DP 506 

.N63 





Copy 1 






w\ 




- 





# 




mm- 









SC< _<«C& <<<C 








^ai 


fcgg* 


<s 


w*a!^<** 


is.^L^<t 


.««*> 












B LIBRARY OF-CONGRESS. a 



Ot £3 



s^ 

^^Q 



{UNITED STATUS OK AMERICA S J| 















« : 



«r «<^ 









tie - <ji 



fe: 



<^ VIC 




^1«S 














<*S1_ < C.<^ 



< C< C « 



BKjfSVsc 



jc^o c ore 


















~<<<r ^ 






RECOLLECTIONS 



AND 



REFLECTIONS, 
PERSONAL AND POLITICAL. 



AS CONNECTED 



WITH PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 



DURING 



THE REIGN OF GEORGE III. 



By John Nicholls, Esq. 

Member of the House of Commons in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and 
eighteenth Parliaments of Great Britain. 






PHILADELPHIA I 

PUBLISHED BY H. C. CARET AND I, LEA* 

No. 126, Chesnut Street. 

1823. 



• N ^ 



ADVERTISEMENT. 



The following Recollections and Re- 
flections were written during a residence 
at Toulouse, in France, between the 20th 
of November 1819, and the 10th of April 

1820. 

The Author is aware that there are 
expressions which may be unacceptable to 
the partisans both of Mr. Pitt and of Mr. 
Fox; but he has spoken with the integrity 
of an historian. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

From the Accession of George the Third in Octo- 
ber 1760, to the Dissolution of Parliament in 
March 1784 . . . . Page 9 

CHAPTER II. 

From the Meeting of Parliament in March 1784, 
to the Commencement of the French Revolution 
in July 1789 . • . * a Page 54 

CHAPTER III. 

Causes of the French Revolution . Page 62 

CHAPTER IV. 

On the Consequences likely to follow from the 
French Revolution . . Page 90 

CHAPEER V. 

Effects produced by the French Revolution in 
England. — Mr. Pitt's Conduct till his Death, 
in 1806 . Page 103 



VI 



CHAPTER VI. 

On the Causes which contributed to the Extin- 
guishment of Feudal Burthens in England 

Page 138 

CHAPTER VII. 

Reform of Parliament . . Page 142 

CHAPTER VIII. 

On the State of Parties in England Page 156 

CHAPTER IX. 

On the Duration of Papal Power . Page 168 

CHAPTER X. 

On the Consequences likely to result from the Es- 
tablishment of the United States of America 

Page 176 

CHAPTER XI. 

On the Effects likely to be produced by the French 
Revolution on other Nations . Page 180 

CHAPTER XII. 

On the British Possessions in India Page 185 



vn 

CHAPTER XIII. 

Impeachment of Mr. Hastings . Page 190 

CHAPTER XIV. 

On Mr. Edmund Burke . . Page 221 

CHAPTER XV. 

On the Slave Trade . . Page 228 

CHAPTER XVI. 

Will Revolution produce an increase of Happiness 
to Mankind ? Page 236 

CHAPTER XVII. 

On the Consequences of the Revolution in Spain 

Page 239 

CHAPTER XVIII. 

On the Consequences of the Transition from an 
Agricultural to a Commercial and Manufactur- 
ing state »•■;--■» v ■■■*"■•.=' * Page 249 

CHAPTER XIX. 

On the Consequences of a King of Great Britain 
being a German Sovereign . Page 259 



vm 



CHAPTER XX. 

Characters of George II and Queen Caroline 

Page 265 

CHAPTER XXL 

Reflections on an intended Marriage between Fre- 
derick Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spen- 
cer Page 275 

CHAPTER XXII. 

On the Consequences produced by the personal 
Character of George III - Page 282 

CHAPTER XXIIL 

On the three Kings of the Brnnsxvick Race 

Page 300 



RECOLLECTIONS, 



CHAPTER I. 



From the Accession of George the Third in Octo- 
ber 1760, to the Dissolution of Parliament in 
March 1784. 

George IL died suddenly about the close of 
October 1760. At that time I was nearly six- 
teen years old ; so that the active part of my life 
has all been passed during the reign of George 
III. 

My father was physician to George II. This 
circumstance led me to see in early life, people 
who were about the Court. I cannot say that the 
nation much regretted the death of George II. 
During the last three years of his reign the war 
against France had been carried on with much 
success; but this was attributed to the energy of 
Mr. Secretary Pitt, who was known to be Minis- 
ter against the wishes of the King. 

The nation hailed with pleasure the accession 
of a Prince born in the country ; they persuaded 

B 



10 

themselves that the interests of England would 
no longer be sacrificed to the interests of Hano- 
ver; and much advantage of this circumstance 
was taken in the first speech of the young King 
to Parliament. « Born and educated in this 
country, I glory in the name of Briton :" the old 
Earl of Hardwicke, the Ex-chancellor, censured 
this expression, saying that it was an insult to the 
memory of the late King ; but the nation was 
pleased with the expression. The young King 
(for he was at that time little more than twenty- 
two years of age) was of a good person, sober, 
temperate, of domestic habits, addicted to no vice, 
swayed by no passion — what had not the nation 
to expect from such a character? There was 
another circumstance which much increased his 
popularity: during the reigns of George I. and 
George II. a considerable part of the nation had 
been as it were proscribed, under the name of 
Tories. The imputation against these men was, 
that they were attached to the family of Stuart : 
probably some of them were attached to that fa- 
mily; but very many were included under the 
denomination of Tories, solely because they had 
disapproved of the corrupt and feeble Adminis- 
trations of Sir Robert Walpole and the Pelhams. 
It was soon remarked, that the Pelham party did 
not possess the partiality of George III. in the 
same manner as they had possessed that of George 
II.; and the Tories saw with pleasure the removal 
of that proscription by which they had been so 



II 

long oppressed. In one word, the nation was 
intoxicated with loyalty. But those who ap- 
proached the court more nearly, perceived cir- 
cumstances which filled them with apprehensions. 
I recollect the expression used to my father 
by Mr. Pratt, at that time Attorney General, af- 
terwards better known by the name of Lord Cam- 
den, within four months after the King's acces- 
sion : u I see already, that this will be a weak 
and an inglorious reign. " I recollect also the re- 
lation which a friend of my father's gave to him 
of a conversation which he had had with Charles 
Townshend : " I said to Charles Townshend, I 
don't want to know any state secrets, but do tell 
me what is the character of this young man V y 
After a pause, Charles Townshend replied, " He 
is very obstinate." It was also observed that the 
Princess Dowager of Wales had kept the young 
Prince from having any confidential intimacy with 
any person except herself and the Earl of Bute : 
the pretence of this was the preservation of his 
morals. In truth, they had blockaded all ap- 
proach to him. A notion has prevailed, that the 
Earl of Bute had suggested political opinions to 
the Princess Dowager ; but this was certainly a 
mistake. In understanding, the Princess Dowa- 
ger w r as far superior to the Earl of Bute ; in what- 
ever degree of favour he stood with her, he did 
not suggest, but he received, her opinions and 
her directions. The late Marquis of Bute told 
me, that at the King's accession, his father, the 



12 

Earl of Bute, had no connexion beyond the pale 
of Leicester House. He added, " I never lived 
with my father, nor did any of his children." 
Could such a man be fit to be a minister? 

The Princess Dowager of Wales was a woman 
of a very sound understanding, and was considered 
as such by all who had occasion to converse with 
her. But she had been educated in the court of 
her father, the Duke of Saxe Gotha ; here she 
had received her ideas of sovereign power, and 
she could never bring herself to feel the necessity, 
that sovereign power should be exercised by a 
King of Great Britain with different sentiments, 
and in a manner different from that in which she 
had seen it exercised at Saxe Gotha. 

Few Englishmen have occasion to see the in- 
terior of the Court of a petty German Prince ; it 
may therefore be difficult to bring Englishmen to 
comprehend the character of such a court. A 
petty German Sovereign is not a magistrate ; he 
is rather the proprietor of the soil, and of the in- 
habitants. His Ministers exist by his breath; 
they are liable to no responsibility except to their 
master ; they fall into insignificance when his fa- 
vour is removed : he resembles more a Polish or 
Hungarian Noble, than a British Sovereign. He 
has an interest that his lands should be well cul- 
tivated, and his people not driven from his terri- 
tory; because, if the lands remained uncultivated, 
his revenues would be lessened; but he collects 
all the revenue which he can, consistently with 



13 

this attention to his interest, and spends it all in 
vanity or personal gratifications. 

When the Princess of Wales came to the Court 
of St. James, she found the British Sovereign a 
very different character from that which she had 
seen at Saxe Gotha. She found him controlled 
by his Ministers, indulged in petty gratifications, 
but compelled to submit to their opinions on all 
important subjects. We cannot be surprised that 
she was disgusted at this ; and it is well known 
that she ever impressed upon the King from his 
early years this lesson, " George, be King." 
And this lesson seems to have influenced the 
King's conduct through the whole of his life. 
Extreme apprehension that his Ministers or others 
might encroach upon his power, an earnest wish 
that he might exercise his power personally, or, 
in other words, that he might be his, own Minis- 
ter, have in a very singular manner marked his 
conduct during the whole of his reign. 

At his accession, he found the Pelham party 
in possession of the Administration ; much 
strengthened by its alliance with Mr. Secretary 
Pitt, and popular from his successful conduct of 
the war. It was perilous to attempt to change 
such an Administration. The late Marquis of 
Rockingham told me, that about the end of Feb- 
ruary 1761, he received a message from the Duke 
of Newcastle, requesting him to be at Newcastle 
House that evening. He went there : on his en- 
tering the room, the Duke of Newcastle ran up to 

jb 2 



14 

him and said, " We have received a message 
from die King, of great importance ; he wishes 
that the Earl of Holdernesse may resign the place 
of Secretary of State for the Northern Depart- 
ment, and receive in lieu of it the Wardenship of 
the Cinque Ports, and that the Earl of Bute may 
be appointed Secretary of State for the Northern 
Department, in the place of the Earl of Holder- 
nesse." When this subject was discussed, the 
Earl of Hardwicke strongly recommended that 
the King's wishes should be complied with with- 
out opposition. He said, " that this was the first 
instance in which the King had interfered in the 
nomination of Ministers : and that resistance to his 
wishes might excite an ill-will which they might 
afterwards regret." The Marquis of Rocking- 
ham told me, that he himself rather objected, and 
desired them to consider, whether, H if they ad- 
mitted, in February 1761, that the Earl of Bute 
was fit to be a Secretary of State, they could say 
in the following year that he was not fit to be a 
Prime Minister ?" But the Earl of Hardwicke's 
opinion prevailed, and the Earl of Bute was ap- 
pointed Secretary of State. 

In the autumn of 1761, Mr. Pitt was removed 
from the office of Secretary of State, and every 
tool of Government employed to run down his 
character and destroy his popularity. 

The old Duke of Newcastle was as much re- 
joiced at the removal of Mr. Pitt as any man. He 
had always felt himself fettered and oppressed by 



15 

the superior mind of Mr. Pitt ; and on Mr. Pitt's 
removal he was weak enough to imagine that he 
should possess the same degree of power as lie 
had possessed before Mr, Pitt's advancement to 
office. But early in the spring 1762, the Duke 
was himself removed from his situation, and the 
Earl of Bute appointed First Lord of the Treasury 
and Prime Minister in his room. During the 
year 1761 there had been a negotiation for peace, 
and M. Bussy had come to London for the pur- 
pose of conducting the negotiation ; but the nego- 
tiation failed, and I think, that whoever carefully 
and impartially examines the papers that passed 
on that occasion, will be of opinion that Mr. Se- 
cretary Pitt did not wish for peace. But the 
young King was anxious for it : and in the course 
of the year 1762, the Earl of Bute opened a new 
negotiation with the Court of France. Peace was 
the result of this negotiation : but the terms of the 
peace were universally abused, though I think it 
would be difficult to show what greater advantages 
could have been obtained ; every thing which we 
did retain, was either injurious or of little benefit* 
The acquisition of Canada, and the extension of 
the limits of our American Colonies, have been 
injurious to us ; the cession of Grenada, and of the 
neutral West India islands, has been of little im- 
portance ; and as it has been since decided, that 
the Slave Trade ought to be abandoned, acquisi- 
tions on the coast of Africa could not be of much 
use. But the language of the nation was, " After 



16 

a most successful war, see how little we have 
gained. " People did not perceive, that the war 
had been continued without a British object; sole- 
ly to support George the Second's Ge rman inter- 
ests, and gratify the ambition of Mr. Pitt. But 
the peace was odious ; the pageant of a boot and 
petticoat paraded through the streets of London, 
frightened the Earl of Bute into a resignation ; and 
the King appointed George Grenville his succes- 
sor. But before I examine the Administration of 
Mr. George Grenville, I will make a few obser- 
vations on the transactions which took place from 
the accession of the King to the retirement of the 
Earl of Bute. 

Mr. Edmund Burke has said, in one of his po- 
litical works, that the plan of an interior Cabinet 
was formed during the life of Frederic Prince of 
Wales. I doubt the correctness of this assertion. 
I think that it must be at least adooted with Great 
allowances. I believe the Princess Dowager of 
Wales had suggested to the King, from his ear- 
liest years, to be his own Minister, and to resist 
the control of those who were in office. She had 
seen the manner in which the Ministers had, at 
different times, thwarted the wishes of George II. 
Perhaps even George II. himself had sometimes 
felt and been indignant at this control : he was a 
foreigner, and feared the return to power of the 
Stuart family. But the Princess Dowager of 
Wales wished her son to be a King, such as she 
had been educated to believe a King ought to be ; 



17 

viz. a King after the model of a Duke of Saxe 
Gotha : and this was the object of that lesson 
which she was continually inculcating to him, 
11 George, be King." But I do not see any rea- 
son for believing that there was any original in- 
tention of forming an interior Cabinet. I believe 
that the plan of the interior Cabinet grew out of 
circumstances which afterwards arose. The first 
wish was, that the Earl of Bute should be advan- 
ced to be Prime Minister; and while he was 
Minister, there was certainly no desire to form an 
interior Cabinet. Most probably the interior Ca- 
binet arose on his retirement from office. When 
the Earl of Bute was made Secretary of State for 
the Northern Department, he found in that office 
Mr. Chares Jenkinson, a man of family, though 
in the inferior situation of a volunteer clerk. The 
Earl of Bute discovered this gentleman's abilities; 
and when he was made First Lord of the Treasu- 
ry, removed Mr. Jenkinson with him to his new 
office, and made him Secretary of the Treasury. 
When the Earl of Bute resigned, Mr. Jenkinson 
was the channel through which confidential com- 
munications were conveyed from the King to the 
Princess Dowager and the Earl of Bute ; and 
this was most probably the origin of the interior 
Cabinet. 

The King, at his accession, had two objects : 
the first was to destroy the Pelham faction, the 
second was to put an end to the war. For his 
attempts to effect those objects, he was more abus- 



18 



ed than for any other act of his life ; although per- 
haps those objects were the most judicious and 
the most meritorious of his reign. But the Pel- 
ham faction was very powerful. Many individu- 
als, not acting under the direction of that faction, 
indulged themselves in gross abuse of the Princess 
Dowager and the Earl of Bute, and even of the 
King himself. This gave occasion to measures 
dictated more by resentment than by judgment, 
and ultimately produced a sort of personal contest 
between the Princess Dowager and the King on 
one side, and John Wilkes on the other. The ge- 
nerous character of the English nation naturally 
led them to take part with the individual whom 
they thought oppressed, and the King was injur- 
ed by the victory. I do not believe that the King 
ever wished to reinstate the Earl of Bute. He 
saw the Earl's want of courage : probably he saw 
his incapacity, and his unfitness to serve his views: 
but it is possible that the Princess Dowager of 
Wales might still retain a wish that the Earl of 
Bute should be replaced in the office of Prime 
Minister. However this might be, whenever the 
new Minister, Mr. Grenville, resisted the wishes 
of the King and the Princess Dowager, he was 
recalled to obedience by a negotiation being 
opened with Mr. Pitt. This negotiation was 
not concealed ; on the contrary, there was a wish 
on the part of the King and the Princess Dowa- 
ger that it should be generally known ; for their 
object was to bring back Mr. Grenville to obe- 



19 

dience, by showing him the danger of his being 
removed, in case he resisted their wishes. And 
while Mr. Grenville remained Minister, these ne- 
gotiations happened not unlrequently. 

But the great measure of Mr. Grenville's Ad- 
ministration was the Stamp Act. This was 
an attempt to raise taxes in the American Colo- 
nies by the vote of a British Parliament ; all taxes 
in the British Colonies having, down to that peri- 
od, been ever voted by their several Colonial As- 
semblies. This measure has produced conse- 
quences so important, not solely to Great Britain, 
but also to so many other states, that one cannot 
pass over it without deep reflection. I have heard 
it doubted, whether the measure originated with 
Mr. George Grenville. I have heard it intimated, 
that the measure originated with the King, that is 
to say, with the King's secret adviser? ; and that 
Mr. Grenville acceded to the plan with consider- 
able reluctance. I have no means of knowing 
whether the measure originated with Mr. Gren- 
ville or with the King. But from the unremitted 
obstinacy with which the King persevered in the 
wish to impose taxes on the Colonies by a Bri- 
tish Parliament, every man must see that it may 
fairly be called the favourite measure of his reign. 
I will examine the subject more fully at another 
time. 

About the beginning of the year 1765, the King 
fell ill ; I know it has been said that his illness 
was a mental derangement, but I do not believe it. 



20 

On his recovery, it occurred to Mr. Grenville and 
the other Ministers, that if the King had died, 
there would have been considerable difficulty in 
appointing a Regent; and as the Prince of Wales 
was then only two years and a half old, a Regen- 
cy, and for a long continuance, would have been 
necessary. They therefore determined to bring 
into Parliament a bill enabling the King to appoint 
a Regent by his will. But Mr. Grenville did not 
choose that the Princess Dowager of Wales 
should be the Regent ; and he probably thought 
that the Princess Dow T ager would be the person 
whom the King would be most disposed to se- 
lect : for during the Princess Dowager's life, the 
Queen does not appear to have had much influence 
over the King. He therefore suggested to the 
King, that his power of appointment must be con- 
fined to the Queen, and the descendants of George 
II. The King resisted this, as he saw that by 
such a limitation he should be precluded from 
nominating the Princess Dowager. Mr. Gren- 
ville persevered ; telling the King, that he could 
not undertake to carry the bill through the House 
of Commons, except his Majesty's power were 
thus limited. The King at length yielded; and 
as the Bill was already in the house of Lords, he 
consented that the Earl of Halifax, Secretary of 
State, should be sent down to the House of Lords 
with a message to the Earl of Northington, at that 
time Chancellor, signifying that it was the King's 
pleasure that his power of appointment should be 



21 

confined to the Queen, and the descendants of 
George II. I have been told, and from good au- 
thority, that the Earl of Northington replied, 
" Your Lordship astonishes me; I should not 
have given credit to such a message if it had not 
been brought to me by one of His Majesty's Se- 
cretaries of State." But the Bill was framed 
agreeably to this message, and sent down in that 
shape to the House of Commons, After the Bill 
had thus passed the Lords, the Earl of Northing- 
ton waited on the King to inform him what had 
been done; adding, that in obedience to the mes- 
sage which he had received through the Earl of 
Halifax, his Majesty would not have the power of 
appointing the Princess Dowager of Wales. The 
King replied, €i Mr. Grenville tells me, that if my 
power of apppointment had been extended to the 
Princess Dowager, he could not have undertaken 
to carry the Bill through the House of Commons." 
" Would your Majesty have wished to have had 
the power of appointing the Princess Dowager ?" 
— iC Most certainly; provided the introduction of 
such a power would not have provoked a debate 
painful to the Princess Dowager herself." The 
Earl of Northington said no more ; but on his re- 
tirement from the King's closet, sent for Mr. John 
Morton, member for Abingdon. To Mr. Mor- 
ton he gave these instructions : " When the Bill 
in your House is in a committee, jump up, and 
move to insert the name of the Princess Dowager 
of Wales, and in the mean time keep die design 

c 



22 

to yourself " Mr. Morton followed the Earl of 
Northington's directions. The Opposition, not 
expecting such an amendment, was not prepared 
to oppose it. It would have been indecent in the 
Ministers to oppose it, and the amendment was 
adopted without one dissenting voice. Mr. Mor- 
ton was an intimate friend of my father, and rela- 
ted this anecdote to him. 

It will easily be supposed, that the Princess 
Dowager was highly indignant at the affront which 
Mr. Grenville had attempted to put on her; and 
the King immediately decided to dismiss him. I 
have been told, that the King did not conceal the 
ground of his displeasure with Mr. Grenville: 
openly saying, * When Mr. Grenville told me, 
that, if the Princess Dowager's name were in- 
serted in the Bill, he could not undertake to carry 
it through the House of Commons, either Mr. 
Grenville did not know the disposition of the 
House of Commons, or he practised a deception 
on me : in either case he is not fit to be my mi- 
nister." 

On the removal of Mr. Grenville, the King ap- 
pointed the Marquis of Rockingham Prime Mi- 
nister. This Nobleman was a man of high ho- 
nour and the strictest integrity; from his accession 
to office to the day of his death, he was never ac- 
cused of being influenced by motives of personal 
interest : his understanding was sound, though 
not brilliant; but he had never before held any 
public situation, nor had he been much conversant 



23 

in business : his friends saw, that with such habits, 
it would be advantageous that he should always 
have near him a man acquainted with political 
subjects, and accustomed to laborious application. 
They selected for this purpose Mr. Edmund 
Burke. When William Gerard Hamilton (ge- 
nerally known by the name of Single-speech Ha- 
milton) went to Ireland as Secretary to the Lord 
Lieutenant, Mr. Edmund Burke attended Mr. 
Hamilton as his private Secretary: he was re- 
warded for this service with a pension of 3001. a 
year; which, as I have heard, he soon after sold 
to relieve his immediate necessities. 

At the time when Mr. Burke was selected to 
be the private Secretary to the Marquis of Rock- 
ingham, he was an author in the service of Mr. 
Dodsley the bookseller; he had conducted for 
that gentleman the Annual Register,, a work of 
considerable reputation and merit, first established 
in the year 1758; and I believe that it was con- 
ducted under the direction of Mr. Burke to a very 
late period of his life. The political knowledge 
of Mr. Burke might be considered almost as an 
Encyclopedia : every man who approached him 
received instruction from his stores; and his fail- 
ings (for failings he had) were not visible at that 
time ; perhaps they did not then exist ; perhaps 
they grew up in the progress of his political life. 
When Mr. Burke entered into the service of the 
Marquis of Rockingham he was not rich, but the 
munificent generosity of that nobleman immedi- 



24 

ately placed him in an affluent situation. Mr. 
Burke purchased a beautiful villa, at Beacons- 
field, which was paid for by the Marquis of Rock- 
ingham. When Dr. Johnson, who, like Mr. 
Burke, had subsisted by his labours as an author, 
visited his friend at his new purchase, he could 
not help exclaiming with the shepherd in Virgil's 
Eclogue, 

" Non equidem invideo, miror magis." 

But the Marquis of Rockingham's liberality was 
not confined to the person of Mr. Burke ; he pro- 
cured for Mr. William Burke, his cousin, and 
most confidential connexion, the employment of 
Under Secretary of State to General Conway; and 
he gave to Mr. Edmund Burke's brother, Richard 
Burke, the place of Collector of the Customs at 
Grenada. I mention these circumstances to 
show, that Lord Rockingham was fully entitled 
to that devoted attachment which Mr. Edmund 
Burke ever paid him to the end of that noble 
Lord's life. 

Let me pause to reflect on the transactions of 
that year in which Lord Rockingham was minis- 
ter. I can discover no faults in the administra- 
tion of public affairs during that year : the conduct 
of Government was wise and upright: by the re- 
peal of the Stamp Act, they put an end to a civil 
dissension, which had been unnecessarily excited. 
Had the measures adopted by Lord Rockingham 
been persevered in, Great Britain, I might almost 



25 

add, Europe, itself, would not have experienced 
that misery, relief from which she now finds so 
difficult. Lord Rockingham repealed the Stamp 
Act ; and from that hour the King determined to 
remove him. Lord Rockingham himself told me, 
that the King never showed him such distinguish- 
ed marks of kindness, as after he had secretly de- 
termined to get rid of him. The Marquis of 
Rockingham accompanied the repeal of the Stamp 
Act with another Act, declaratory of the right. I 
know that he has been much censured for this 
measure. Mr. Pitt recommended that the Stamp 
Act should be repealed by an Act declaring that 
the claim of the British Parliament was unconsti- 
tutional and illegal. This would most certainly 
have been the bolder measure ; but we must re- 
collect the situation of Lord Rockingham when 
he proposed to Parliament the repeal of the Stamp 
Act. In his front he had a formidable opposition : 
in his rear the household troops, ready to declare 
against him : it was his duty to consider what 
measures were practicable ; I will even go one 
step further, it was his duty not unnecessarily to 
offend the King. The plan which he brought 
forward, of an Act, declaratory of the right, while 
it relinquished the exercise of that right, had been 
formerly adopted on a dispute with Ireland, of a 
nature somewhat similar. When the civil dis- 
sension with America had been put an end to, who 
could imagine that the King and the interior Ca- 
binet would wish to renew it ? 

c 2 



26 

The Administration of Lord Rockingham last- 
ed one year, and, I believe, a few days more. On 
his removal, the King sent for the Ex-Secretary 
Mr. Pitt, and requested him to form an Adminis- 
tration. From the reports circulated at that time, 
it seems as if Mr. Pitt had been the dupe of those 
apparent marks of kindness which the King knew 
so well how to practise whenever he thought 
them necessary. Mr. Pitt thought that he pos- 
sessed the entire confidence of the King, and 
acted as if the selection of his colleagues depen- 
ded wholly upon himself. This occasioned a 
breach between him and his brother-in-law, Earl 
Temple ; and, as Mr. Burke has remarked in a 
pamphlet subsequently published, " When Mr. 
Pitt had formed his Cabinet, he was no longer 
Minister." It is much to be regretted, that 
when the Marquis of Rockingham formed his 
Administration, in 1765, he did not feel the ad- 
vantage which would have been derived from Mr. 
Pitt being in his Cabinet. Lord Rockingham 
must at that time have fully known the King's 
character ; he must have been sensible of the dif- 
ficulty which every Administration would have 
in restraining the King from pursuing his own pri- 
vate views, in opposition to the opinion of his os- 
tensible Ministers. The experienced mind, the 
popularity, the venerable character of that great 
Statesman Mr. Pitt, would have added strength 
to his government. What a different Cabinet 
would it have been, if, instead of that contempti. 



27 

ble old man the Duke of Newcastle, he had made 
Mi\ Pitt Lord Privy Seal ! But, although an ap- 
parent union had subsisted, from 1757 to 1761, 
between the Pelham party and Mr. Pitt, yet the 
Pelham party had always hated Mr. Pitt ; they 
felt themselves oppressed by the superiority of his 
mind, and perhaps he had sometimes unnecessa- 
rily made them sensible of their inferiority. Lord 
Rockingham had been educated from early life in 
this party ; and, from that circumstance, most 
probably, felt no inclination to be united with Mr. 
Pitt. 

In forming his Cabinet, Mr. Pitt made the 
Duke of Grafton First Lord of the Treasury. 
His own health disqualified him from holding that 
office, and he chose for himself the office of Lord 
Privy Seal, with an earldom. But he admitted 
into his Cabinet so many persons not sincerely at- 
tached to him or to his measures, that, whenever 
ill health compelled him to absent himself from 
the Cabinet, measures were adopted wholly re- 
pugnant to Mr. Pitt's views. His removal to the 
House of Lords deprived him of a great portion 
of his power. From this circumstances, Charles 
Townshend remained indisputably the first speak- 
er in the House of Commons. Mr. Burke, in 
one of his political speeches, calls him " that pro- 
digy Charles Townshend." I have heard the late 
Lord Thurlow say, that Charles Townshend was 
the most delightful speaker he ever heard. For 
myself, I never heard him but once ; and that was 



28 

not on an occasion in which his powers could be 
fairly shown, for he had himself arranged that he 
should on that day be in a minority. It was on 
that debate, previous to the dissolution of Parlia- 
ment in 1768, when the land-tax was reduced from 
four shillings to three shillings : or, as it was lu- 
dicrously said, when the country gentlemen brib- 
ed themselves with a shilling in the pound of their 
own land-tax. 

Mr. Charles Townshend was soon taken into 
the Duke of Grafton's Cabinet, and made Chan- 
cellor of the Exchequer. I will not use so strong 
an expression as to say that he was treacherous to 
this iVdministration, but he certainly saw that the 
Earl of Chatham's greatness was on the decline ; 
and that he should most readily increase his own 
importance by acquiescing in the wishes of the 
King. He therefore brought forward measures 
tending to revive the question of the right of the 
British Parliament to tax the American Colonies; 
but his premature death protects him from being 
considered as the author of the American war. 

The Duke of Grafton, who had been made 
First Lord of the Treasury, was certainly a man 
of a very feeble mind ; he had about him at that 
time a Secretary of the name of Thomas Brad- 
shavv ; and a mistress, formerly known by the 
name of Nancy Parsons, at that time bearing the 
name of Mrs. Horton, afterwards Lady Maynard. 
Those who wished to destroy the Earl of Chat- 
ham's Administration saw, that they should very 



29 

much advance their designs if they could separate 
the Duke of Grafton from the Earl of Chatham : 
they had gained over the Duke's Secretary, Mr. 
Bradshaw ; but they could not corrupt his mis- 
tress. She had the sense to see that the Duke's 
honour required him to remain firm in his connexion 
with the Earl of Chatham. She had the sense 
to see this, and she had the integrity to tell him 
so. Her influence for some time prevented the 
Duke of Grafton from deserting the Earl of Chat- 
ham. When this was seen, those who wished 
the destruction of that Administration changed 
the direction of their batteries ; instead of using 
their efforts to separate the Duke of Grafton from 
the Earl of Chatham, they employed them to se- 
parate him from his mistress. In this they suc- 
ceeded, and married him to Miss Wrottesley, the 
niece of the Duchess of Bedford. To separate 
him from the Earl of Chatham was then an easy 
task. Thus fell the Earl of Chatham's Adminis- 
tration ; and, I believe, the Earl was never after in 
any public office. 

Very soon after the formation of this Cabinet, 
the Earl of Chatham had fallen into an ill state of 
health, and remained so for many months : his ill- 
ness was of that nature that he was incapable of 
any application to public business: The secret 
junto availed themselves of this circumstance ; 
and such was the imbecility of the Duke of Graf- 
ton, that sometimes Lord Chatham's measures 
were pursued, and sometimes measures directly 



30 

the reverse of them were brought forward. When 
the interior Cabinet had sufficiently disgraced the 
Duke of Grafton, they frightened him into a re- 
signation. 

From the formation of Lord Chatham's Cabi- 
net, in 1766, to the ultimate determination, in 
1774, of forcing the Americans into rebellion, the 
measures adopted seem to have been calculated 
to provoke and irritate the Americans. Perhaps 
this was not the intention of those in power, but 
it w f as the result of the different measures at diffe- 
rent times adopted : sometimes the Earl of Chat- 
ham's opinion prevailed, viz. that the British Par- 
liament had no right to tax the American Colo- 
nies. At other times the opinion of the interior 
Cabinet prevailed, viz. that the King was humi- 
liated if the right of the British Parliament to tax 
America was not asserted. 

But before I consider the measures adopted 
against the Americans in the session of 1773-1774, 
let me make a few remarks on two measures of 
this Parliament, viz. the expulsion of John Wilkes 
from the House of Commons, and the Royal Fa- 
mily Marriage Act of 1772. The expulsion of 
John Wilkes from the House of Commons, in 
1769, was brought forward purely to gratify the 
resentment of the interior Cabinet against that 
gentleman. John Wilkes had no virtues that en- 
titled him to the esteem of his country, but he 
was a persecuted man. The generous character 
of Englishmen led them to take part with a man 



31 

persecuted by power : he became popular be- 
cause the Court had oppressed him. It may not 
be improper to mention here a little anecdote, 
which I received from the late Mr. Sergeant 
Glynn, the confidential friend and law adviser of 
John Wilkes. Earl Temple had furnished Mr. 
Wilkes with a qualification to enable him to stand 
for Middlesex ; but Mr. Wilkes was at that time 
under a sentence of outlawry for a misdemeanor, 
viz. for the libel published in the North Briton, 
No. 45. It was a matter of uncertainty whether 
this judgment of outlawry could be reversed by a 
writ of error ; and, if the judgment of outlawry 
were not reversed, the freehold estate of 600/. a 
year, which Earl Temple had granted to Mr. 
Wilkes, for his life, would have been forfeited. 
Earl Temple would not expose himself to this 
risk ; it was therefore arranged, that if Mr. Wilkes 
should be called on at the poll to produce his 
qualification, he should immediately decline the 
poll; but Mr. Wilkes was not called on. I men- 
tion this anecdote, to show how often important 
events depend on little circumstances. If Mr. 
Wilkes had not been elected for Middlesex, his 
expulsion, and all the consequent questions, could 
never have taken place. But the most important 
consequence resulting from this persecution was, 
that it appeared that there was no measure so hu- 
miliating to those who supported it, but that a ma- 
jority of the House of Commons might be brought 
to vote for it. It was seen that this Hoise of 



32 

Commons, elected under the auspices of the Duke 
of Grafton, in 1768, was perfectly well suited to 
adopt every measure proposed by the interior 
Cabinet. 

The Royal Family Marriage Act of 1772, was 
the measure of importance next brought forward. 
I think it is the wickedest Act in the Statute 
Book. It was brought forward to gratify the late 
Queen's pride, to protect her from the mortifica- 
tion of having the Countess Dowager of Walde- 
grave and Mrs. Horton raised to the rank of her 
sisters-in-law. The reason assigned for bringing 
forward this Act, was to prevent the King's chil- 
dren from contracting improper marriages; but 
this was only a pretence. The King's eldest son, 
who has now succeeded to the Throne, was at 
that time only nine years and a half old ; and as 
far as regarded the honour of the King's children, 
or the succession of a person from an humble 
walk in life, the Act was wholly inadequate : it 
was the late Queen's German pride which was to 
be protected. I remember an intimate friend of 
mine, then high in office, using to me this lan- 
guage, a very short time after the Act had been 
passed : " And now all our trouble and all our 
danger appear to have been unnecessary, for the 
Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Cumberland 
have been with the King, and told him, that they 
were married before the Act was passed." The 
Bill was carried through the two Houses with 
great difficulty. In the House of Commons it 



as 

was carried only by a majority of forty ; and in 
the House of Lords nineteen Peers entered a pro- 
test, declaring that the Bill, if passed into a law, 
would be void. I think they were right in this 
opinion. Sir Edward Coke, Sir Matthew Hale, 
and Sir John Holt, have all laid down this doc- 
trine in the most explicit terms, that an Act of 
Parliament repugnant to the law of God, is void. 
Suppose an Act of Parliament were passed, de- 
claring that those who have been made the ob- 
jects of this royal Family Marriage Act, viz. the 
descendants of George II. should be dispunisha- 
ble for murder, would such an Act be void, or 
valid ? I think no man can hesitate to say, that 
such an Act would be void ; because it would 
permit men to do that with impunity which God 
has forbidden them to do. The law of God has 
not commanded marriage, but it has pointed it 
out as the means by which man may continue his 
race, and live in his posterity. What right could 
Parliament have to say, " The children of the 
Dukes of Gloucester and Cumberland shall die 
without issue V I hesitate to speak of the mis- 
chiefs which have been already produced by this 
Act. I fear still more to point out the greater 
mischiefs which mav hereafter flow from it. 
What tyranny has not been practised over His 
present Majesty ? what cruelty has not been ex- 
ercised towards the Duke of Sussex and his chil- 
dren ? It was well said by some persons, while 
this Bill was depending in Parliament, that the 

jo 



34 

title of the Bill should be, " An Act to encourage 
Fornication and Adultery in the Descendants of 
George II." But the subject is too painful ; I 
will say no more on it. 

The Parliament closed its career with passing 
Acts intended either to compel the Americans to 
yield unconditional submission, or to take arms 
immediately in defence of their rights : they chose 
the latter ; they declared that George III. had for- 
feited all right to their allegiance, and erected 
themselves into a Federative Republic. This 
Parliament was then dissolved. The American 
war was persevered in for eight years. The in- 
habitants of this island were deluded into the sup- 
port of it. I recollect in one debate, Lord North 
stated, that the inhabitants of Great Britain, con- 
sidered collectively, paid one man with another 
twenty-five shillings a year in taxes ; while the in- 
habitants of our American Colonies, considered 
collectively, paid each only sixpence a year in 
taxes ; he added, i€ Is this equitable V 9 The 
country gentlemen were weak enough to believe, 
that by persevering in the contest, their taxes 
would be diminished. The language held in the 
House of Commons sufficiently proved that the 
Americans were not represented in that House. 
The war was considered as the war of the King 
personally. Those who supported it were called 
the King's friends ; while those who wished the 
country to pause, and reconsider the propriety of 
persevering in the contest, were branded as dis- 
4 oval. 



35 

The zealous supporters of the American war 
have thrown blame on the War Minister, and the 
Generals who conducted it. In this I think they 
have acted unjustly. I believe that Lord George 
Germaine was as able a War Minister as could 
have been found ; and the Generals employed 
were men of the first reputation. It always ap- 
peared to me that the design of compelling the 
Americans to submit to be taxed by a British Par- 
liament, was a wild and absurd project. The loose 
texture (if I may be allowed the expression) of 
American population, rendered the conquest of 
the country impracticable. Wherever our army 
appeared the people submitted ; but whenever 
our army moved forward, the people who had 
submitted resumed their arms. We never at- 
tempted more than the conquest of the eastern 
side of America ; had we succeeded Jn that, the 
war would still have been continued by the inha- 
bitants of the Back Settlements ; and if the Ame- 
ricans had ultimately been subdued, what must 
have been the size of that army which must have 
been maintained there for the purpose of enforcing 
submission, and collecting revenue ? I believe 
no man now will maintain either the justice or 
the policy of the American contest : we are come 
to this opinion, although only the short space of 
thirty-six years has elapsed since the contest was 
relinquished. A century hence, men will won- 
der how the people of England could have been 
deluded to engage in it. 



36 

After the defeat and capture of General Bur- 
goyne at Saratoga, a friend of Lord North's said 
to him, " My Lord, you must deceive yourself 
no longer ; you must now see that the whole 
population of America is hostile to your designs/' 
Lord North replied, " I see that as clearly as you 
do ; and the King shall either consent to allow me 
to assure the House of Commons, that some 
means shall be found to put an end to the war, or 
I will not continue to be his Minister." I had 
this anecdote from the friend with whom this 
conversation passed. Lord North was no incon- 
siderable Statesman : he seems never to have been 
particularly attentive to the promotion of his own 
personal interests, and I have no doubt that he 
would have preferred to have pursued those mea- 
sures which he thought most beneficial to his 
country ; but the place of Prime Minister was 
pleasant to him, and he persevered in the war for 
four years longer. 

At the close of the year 1781, the capture of 
Earl Cornwallis's army was announced : the slight- 
est reflection must then have convinced every 
man, that the continuance of the war could have 
no other effect than that of exhausting the nation 
still more. Many of those country Gentlemen, 
who had till that time supported Lord North^ 
signified to him that the war must be relinquish- 
ed. I have been told, that at a meeting of Lord 
North's confidential friends, three measures were 
resolved on : first, That Lord George Germaine 



37 

should be dismissed ; secondly, That the Earl of 
Sandwich should retire ; thirdly, That Lord North 
should insist, that the King should permit him to 
assure the House of Commons that some means 
should be found to put an end to the American 
war ; and if the King refused to permit him to 
give such an assurance, that Lord North should 
resign. The Minister approved of this advice. 
Lord George Germaine was removed. The re- 
moval of the Earl of Sandwich was delayed. 
During the interval occasioned by the delay, 
Charles Fox moved an inquiry into the conduct of 
Lord Sandwich : it would have been inconsistent 
with the honour of the Noble Earl to have resign- 
ed before that inquiry had been gone through ; it 
was therefore necessary that he should be de- 
fended : he was successfully defended, but the 
defence weakened Lord North. Many mem- 
bers refused to vote; others voted with reluc- 
tance : the defence of the Earl of Sandwich evin- 
ced that Lord North's majority was tired of the 
American wan 

The Opposition in Parliament was at that time 
composed of two distinct corps — Rockinghams 
and Shelburnes; they were like Hessians and 
Hanoverians in the same camp. The probability 
of Lord North's fall was visible ; and the import- 
ance of a perfect union between the Rockinghams 
and Shelburnes was equally manifest. I had at 
that time very confidential intercourse with seve- 
ral of the leaders of the Rockingham party : and 

d 2 



38 

I had much intimacy with Mr. Dunning, the effi- 
cient leader of the Shelburne party in the House 
of Commous. I availed myself of those circum- 
stances to urge to all of them the great advantage 
that would be derived from a sincere union be- 
tween these parties. I found Mr. Dunning fully 
sensible of the importance of such a union ; and 
he assured me that it was most anxiously desired 
by the Earl of Shelburne. When I urged the 
subject to Mr. Burke, he treated it with con- 
tempt : he said, < 4 The Earl of Shelburne's party 
is of no consequence ; it does not consist of more 
than six or eight members ;" and I remember he 
enumerated them. But the Shelburne party was 
more numerous at that time than Mr. Burke chose 
to believe ; and subsequent events proved their 
strength. When I mentioned to Mr. Dunning 
the small number which Mr. Burke said the Shel- 
burne party consisted of, I remember his answer : 
" Non numeremur sed ponderemurP When I 
talked on the subject with Admiral Keppel, the 
answer he made me was this : Ci I see the advan- 
tage of the union as much as you can do : for my- 
self, I stand well with both the parties, and am 
deeply interested that such a union should take 
place ; but the Earl of Shelburne has that degree 
of ill-will to Mr. Burke, that no union ever can 
take place between the parties." I do not know 
what ill-will the Earl of Shelburne had to Mr. 
Burke ; but, from the conversation which I had 
at different times with Mr. Burke, I am satisfied 



39 

that his hatred to the Earl of Shelburne was at 
least equal to that which the Earl of Shelburne 
might have to him. 

Sir George Savile died in the early part of the 
year 1781: he was a very wise and a very up- 
right man. His death was a great loss to the 
Marquis of Rockingham ; for from that time there 
was no man to check the ascendant which Mr. 
Burke sometimes improperly exercised over that 
nobleman. 

At an early period after the commencement 
of the American war, while the Rockingham party 
formed the great mass of opposition to that war, 
Mr. Edmund Burke was the leader of that party 
in the liouse of Commons; and if victory had at- 
tended their efforts, it was their intention to have 
made him the minister: but during the latter years 
of that Parliament, which was dissolved in 1780, 
Mr. Burke was become unpopular with the party. 
His unpopularity was to so great a degree, that it 
was a matter of consideration whether he should 
not retire from Parliament. It was ultimately re- 
solved that he should not retire, but that Mr. 
Charles Fox should take the command of the 
Rockingham party in the House of Commons, 
and be brought in member for Westminster by 
their influence. The change was judicious ; and, 
although the exertions of Mr. Fox, during the 
session of 1780-81, did not appear to have much 
effect, yet, in the session of 1781-82, he complet- 
ed the overthrow of Lord North, and prevailed 



40 

on the House of Commons to express their wish 
that the contest with America should be relin- 
quished. 

This session was the glorious campaign of 
Charles Fox: his health was entire, his troops 
followed him with confidence, he felt that he was 
gaining ground on every debate ; 

££ His spirit lent a fire 
" E'en to the meanest peasant in the camp." 

I still retain the remembrance of the pleasure 
which I experienced from the events of that ses- 
sion; and whatever mistakes Charles Fox might 
afterwards make (and he certainly made some), 
the service he did his country that session can 
never be forgotten. His exertions terminated the 
contest; had it been continued much longer, the 
country must have sunk. Lord North had always 
said that he would abandon the contest whenever 
the house of Commons declared such abandon- 
ment to be their wish. As soon as he found him- 
self in a minority, he signified to the King that he 
would resign. It was well known that the King 
was very eager for the continuance of the war. It 
was reported that the King offered Lord North to 
dissolve the Parliament: and that Lord North re- 
plied, " That measure will do your Majesty no 
service," I was told by one of Lord North's 
most intimate friends (but I do not vouch for 
the truth of it), that, after the King had in vain 
urged Lord North to remain Minister, his anger 



41 

got the better of his prudence, and he said to 
Lord North, ** You must then answer it to the 
country for having gone on so long." When 
Lord North had signified to the House of Com- 
mons that he was no longer Minister, a cessation 
of hostilities necessarily took place. The King 
sent Lord Thurlow, the Chancellor, to the Mar- 
quis of Rockingham, to request his assistance in 
forming an administration. Lord Rockingham 
replied, " that he was very willing to serve His 
Majesty, but requested the honour of being ad- 
mitted to a private audience before any adminis- 
tration should be arranged." The King then sent 
for the Earl of Shelburne, arranged the adminis- 
tration with him, and then sent the Earl of Shel- 
burne to the Marquis of Rockingham, to inform 
him of the names of the gentlemen who were to 
form the Cabinet, and of the different offices which 
they were to fill. 

No man was at that time more confidential with 
the Marquis of Rockingham than Admiral Kep- 
pel, who told me that Lord Rockingham himself 
was very averse to accept the office offered him; 
that the noble Lord thought that the King had 
manifested such personal dislike to him, by re- 
fusing him an audience, and arranging the Admi- 
nistration with Lord Shelburne, that in his own 
opinion he was not a fit person to be in the King's 
service. Edmund Burke and Charles Fox were 
both very solicitous that the Marquis should ac- 
cept office. I understood that Lord Rockingham 



4,2 

was ultimately prevailed on, by the opinion and 
influence of the Duke of Richmond. That noble 
Duke pledged himself for the honourable conduct 
of the Earl of Shelburne. When Lord Rocking- 
ham had signified his acceptance of the place of 
First Lord of the Treasury, the King appointed 
so distant a time for receiving him, that three en- 
tire days elapsed before his Majesty saw his new 
Minister. By this treatment his Majesty happily 
expressed the sentiments he entertained for him. 
The Cabinet was composed of eleven : five Rock- 
inghams, five Shelburnes, the King retaining one, 
viz. Lord Thurlow. 

Every man saw that such a cabinet was form- 
ed for contention, and that it could not long hold 
together. From the very outset, the Rocking- 
hams abused Lord Shelburne ; but I do not see 
that they had much right to do so. It was owing 
to their own folly in listening to Mr. Edmund 
Burke, that a union had not taken place between 
them and the Shelburnes early in that session. 
When Lord North fell, the Rockinghams and 
Shelburnes were distinct parties. After having 
received Lord Rockingham's answer, through 
Lord Thurlow, the King sent for the Earl of 
Shelburne, and desired him to form an adminis- 
tration. He arranged the Cabinet, and assigned 
to Lord Rockingham the post of Prime Minister. 
This was the justification which Lord Shelburne 
made of his conduct; adding, " I passed my el- 
dest to Lord Rockingham, which I had no occa- 



43 

sion to do, for I might have been Prime Minister 
myself." But the parties hated each other : 
they could not conceal this hatred even on the day 
on which they kissed hands for their several ap- 
pointments. On that clay, they found that Mr. 
Dunning was to be created a Peer. This had 
not been previously notified to Lord Rockingham. 
Mr. Burke was furious : " What," said he, 
" shall Lord Shelburne make a Peer, and you not 
name one ? Think of somebody, whom you 
may recommend for a Peerage." I They at length 
fixed on Sir Fletcher Norton, a man who had 
never done their party any service. And when 
Lord Rockingham went in to the King, he recom- 
mended Sir Fletcher Norton for a Peerage. The 
King had sufficient penetration to perceive the mo- 
tive which induced Lord Rockingham to recom- 
mend Sir Fletcher Norton ; he saw that it was 
purely to enable him to appear to have equal in- 
fluence with the Earl of Shelburne. It is report- 
ed that the King said to Lord Rockingham, " Is 
it your Lordship's particular wish that Sir Flet- 
cher Norton should be made a Peer?" Lord 
Rockingham declined answering in the affirmative; 
but said he thought Sir Fletcher Norton ought to 
be a Peer. He accordingly was made a Peer, 
and voted against the Rockinghams in the ensuing 
session. 

But every day brought forth new proof of the 
hatred of the parties to each other. The Rocking- 
hams every where abused Lord Shelburne for 



44 

want of good faith. The reply of the Shelburnes 
was, that they were no ways pledged to Lord 
Rockingham. If any man applied to Lord Rock- 
ingham for an employment, and failed to obtain 
it, he had but to signify this the next day to the 
Earl of Shelburne, who immediately got the place 
for him. On the other hand, if a man went first 
to the Earl of Shelburne, his answer was, " You 
should not apply to me, I am not the Minister. 
Lord Rockingham is the Minister ; he is the man 
to whom you should apply." I had an acquain- 
tance who succeeded with both of them ; it was 
Humphry Sturt, the Member for Dorsetshire. 
He applied to Lord Rockingham for a writership, 
in Bengal, for a younger son. Lord Rocking- 
ham answered, " After the support which you 
have uniformly given us, Mr. Sturt, you certainly 
are entitled to ask for such a favour ; you shall 
have it." A few days after, Mr. Sturt met the 
Earl of Shelburne riding in the Park. " Why, 
Sturt," said the Earl, '< how could you think of 
applying to the Marquis of Rockingham for a 
writership for your son ? I thought it would suit 
you, and I kept a Bengal writership for you." — 
11 My Lord, I have another younger son ; give me 
your writership for him." Lord Shelburne 
could not disengage himself from this voluntary 
offer, and Humphry Sturt got both the writer- 
ships. 

After this motley Cabinet had existed about 
three months, an epidemic disease broke out in 



lb 

London ; they gave it the name of the influenza. 
The Marquis of Rockingham was seized with it. 
His bodily frame had for many years been weak. 
From the formation of his Cabinet he had been 
constantly agitated, partly by the conduct of Lord 
Shelburne, more perhaps by the violence and ar- 
rogance of Mr. Burke ; and was possibly vexed 
with himself for having suffered others to prevail 
on him to accept of office against his own better 
judgment. He sunk under the disease. I will 
not say that the Marquis of Rockingham had a 
strong mind, but he loved his country, and all his 
actions promoted its interests. I never received 
any personal favours from Lord Rockingham ; 
but approbation of his conduct has uniformly in- 
fluenced my political life. 

Within three hours after the Marquis of Rock- 
ingham's death was known, a friend of mine call- 
ed on Charles Fox. The question which natural- 
ly occurred was, " Who is to succeed Lord 
Rockingham as First Lord of the Treasury V y 
Mr. Fox replied, cc I think it must be the Earl of 
Shelburne ; he is first oars, and I do not see how 
we can resist his claim. " But Mr. Burke had 
afterwards sufficient influence with Mr. Fox, and 
the other leaders of the Rockingham party, to 
prevail on them to resist the appointment of the 
Earl of Shelburne. He insisted that the Duke 
of Portland should be sent for from Ireland, 
where he was at that time Lord Lieutenant, and 
appointed First Lord of the Treasury. This pro- 

E 



46 

posal was offensive, even to some of the Rocking- 
ham party, particularly to the Duke of Richmond; 
who said, that as the Duke of Portland was pro- 
vided for in Ireland, he himself had a better right 
to be considered as the head of the Rockingham 
party. But this was not acceptable to Mr. Burke; 
for the Duke of Richmond was not sufficiently 
under his guidance. At a meeting held soon after 
at Earl Fitzwilliam's, Mr. Burke used such coarse 
language respecting the Earl of Shelburne, that in- 
tercourse, even in appearance friendly, could no 
longer exist between the parties. The Earl of 
Shelburne was made First Lord of the Treasury, 
and the Rockinghams resigned their employ- 
ments. The Earl of Shelburne then opened a 
negotiation for peace, and at the close of that year, 
or the beginning of the next, the peace was sign- 
ed. This peace was certainly made against the 
wishes of the King ; who, though he probably had 
no desire to remove the Earl of Shelburne, deter- 
mined to make that Noble Earl feel his displea- 
sure. The household troops were therefore 
ordered to express in Parliament their disappro- 
bation of the peace. 

About this time, a coalition had taken place 
between Lord North and his friends on one side, 
and Mr. Fox and his party on the other. This 
coalition was very beneficial to Lord North ; for 
it protected him from all future examination of 
his conduct, in having carried on the American 
war. It was beneficial to Mr. Fox, as it gave 



47 

him the immediate support of the partizans ot 
Lord North ; but it disgusted the country, and 
excited that odium against Mr. Fox which many 
years were scarcely sufficient to extinguish. The 
King had not intended to remove the Earl of 
Shelburne ; but that Noble Lord would not sub- 
mit to the affront which the King had put on him. 
He therefore resigned ; and the King, contrary to 
his intentions, was under the necessity of placing 
the Administration in the hands of the Coalition. 

Let me here mention a little anecdote, which I 
think does honour to Lord North ; because it 
shows that he was sensible to kindness. In the 
spring 1782, when Lord North resigned, the 
King's resentment against him was so strong, 
that he meant to withhold the pension, usually 
granted to a prime Minister, on his retirement 
from office. The Chancellor, Lord Thurlow, re- 
presented to the King, that Lord North was not 
opulent ; that his father was still living ; and that 
his sons had spent a great deal of money. The 
King answered, " Lord North is no friend of 
mine." — " That may be, Sir," replied Lord 
Thurlow, u bnt the world thinks otherwise ; and 
your Majesty's character requires, that Lord 
North should have the usual pension." The pen- 
sion was granted. 

On the Coalition coming into office in 1783, 
Lord North accepted the employment of Secreta- 
ry of State for the Home Department. Charles 
Fox had determined that Lord Thurlow should 



48 

not retain the great seal, and the King was obli- 
ed to submit. Lord North, as Secretary of State 
for the Home Department, received orders io 
write to Lord Thurlow, signifying his dismission 
from the post of Chancellor. He refused to obey 
these orders, and assigned this reason, " When I 
retired from office in 1782, Lord Thurlow was 
the man who prevented my retreat from being in- 
convenient to me ; shall the first act of my return 
to office be to give Lord Thurlow pain? I will 
not do it." Lord North's refusal was sufficiently 
amusing to the King, who had a right to say, 
" While I keep Secretaries I am not bound to 
write my own letters." Lord North persevered; 
and after a delay of several days, Charles Fox, 
though it was not in his department, was obliged 
to write the letter. 

The Coalition ultimately proved beneficial to 
the King himself ; for the abuse of that power 
which the Coalitionists had acquired, produced 
an oblivion of the miseries which the King had 
brought on the country by the American war. 

The feeble mind of the Duke of Portland, the 
indolence of Lord North, and the yielding tem- 
per of Charles Fox, accustomed to rely on Mr. 
Burke on political subjects, all concurred to give 
to Mr. Burke the direction of public affairs. The 
peace had been made, but nothing was done for 
the relief of the people. Almost at the outset of 
this Administration, in the business of Powell and 
Bembridge, Mr. Burke had very nearly run the 



49 

Coalition Ministers aground. Charles Fox saw the 
necessity of stopping him, and the embarrassment 
was removed. But India was the great object 
of Mr. Burke's attention. It was in India that 
he looked for power to his party, and opulence 
for himself and his family. Having used this ex- 
pression, his family, I think it necessary to men- 
tion an anecdote, which I know only from the re- 
lation of others, but which I believe to be true. 

Soon after Mr. Edmund Burke became a poli- 
tical character, he, and his cousin William Burke, 
embarked in a speculation in Indiar stock. They 
prevailed on many of their friends to join them, 
among others, on Earl Verney, who fell a victim 
to this connexion. They used much solicitation 
with Sir Joshua Reynolds to join them, but he was 
dissuaded from it by Anthony Chamier, for which 
Anthony Chamier, as he told me himself, was 
never forgiven by the Burkes. This speculation 
was at first extremely successful, but at last it 
failed. William Burke, and Lord Verney, were 
announced as the defaulters; and Edmund Burke's 
name was concealed. William Burke was sent to 
India, and a situation at the Court of the Rajah of 
Tanjore obtained for him. Other advantages in 
India were also obtained for this gentleman. 

When the Coalition came into power, Mr. 
Burke saw that much strength might be acquired 
for his party, by the seizure of India patronage. 
With this view Charles Fox was employed to 

e 2 



so 

bring in the India Bill, generally known by the 
the name of Fox's India Bill. But I am firmlv 
persuaded that Mr. Fox had nothing to do with the 
formation of this Bill. It was prepared by Mr. 
Edmund Burke, whose only assistant in it was 
Mr. Pigot, afterwards Sir Arthur Pigot. Mr. 
Lee, at that time Attorney General, and Sir James 
Mansfield, at tha£.time Solicitor General, both as- 
sured me, that they never saw the Bill, until it 
was printed for the use of the House of Com- 
mons. They doubted whether Charles Fox him- 
self had seen the Bill, before the essential parts of 
it had been completely arranged by Mr. Burke. 
Lord North certainly did not see it until the Bill 
was completed ; and when it was shown him, he 
said with his usual pleasantry and sagacity, "that 
he thought it a good receipt to knock up an Ad- 
ministration." But he supported it in the House 
of Commons. 

The great object of this Bill was to vest, for 
a certain number of years, the patronage of the 
India Company in fifteen directors, to be nomi- 
nated by Parliament ; in other words, to be nomi- 
nated by those gentlemen who were at that time 
the King's Ministers. Had the bill passed, those 
who were then Ministers would have been almost 
irremoveable ; for who would have ventured to 
become the King's Ministers, when those who 
retired from office, would have carried with them 
the patronage of India? I know not how it hap- 
pened, but this circumstance, which was really 



51 

the great objection to the Bill, was very little ar- 
gued in the House of Commons. The language 
chiefly used was, that it was a confiscation of pro- 
perty, and a violation of the India Company's 
chartered rights. But the political objections I 
have alluded to, operated with those who reflected 
more deeply. The King had the sagacity to see, 
that the existence of his power depended on the 
rejection of the Bill. The household troops were 
brought forward, and the Bill was rejected in the 
House of Lords. I feel myself bound to acknow- 
ledge, that while this Bill was depending in the 
House of Commons, I did not feel the effects which 
it would have produced, if passed into an Act. I 
voted for the Bill. Gratitude to those who had 
terminated the American war, perhaps an opinion 
that the King's character required that he should 
be controlled by a strong Administration, led me 
to listen to no objections. But I rejoice that the 
Bill did not pass. Royalty might have been re- 
duced to an insignificance highly injurious to the 
people. 

On the removal of the Coalition, the King ap- 
pointed Mr. Pitt First Lord of the Treasury. His 
acceptance of office was a very bold measure, for 
he had against him a most formidable opposition 
in the House of Commons, conducted by leaders, 
whom he could not expect to find over- scrupulous 
in the means they would employ. And although 
the coalition of Mr. Fox with Lord North had 
much diminished the popularity of the former, yet 



52 

it was not certain that the people would declare 
for the King, against the Whig party. There 
certainly were moments, in which it was doubted, 
whether it would not be most advisable that Mr. 
Pitt should resign. In one of these moments, 
Mr. Grosvenor, member for Chester, called to- 
gether the leaders of the two parties, at the St. 
Alban's Tavern. The Duke of Portland had 
objected, that he could not meet Mr. Pitt, while 
he continued Minister; because the House of 
Commons had resolved, that Mr. Pitt had come 
into office under such circumstances as precluded 
them from placing confidence in him. To obvi- 
ate this objection, it was arranged that the King 
should write a letter to the Duke of Portland, re- 
questing him to meet Mr. Pitt for the purpose of 
forming an Administration; and the Duke con- 
sented to consider such a letter as tantamount to 
a declaration, that Mr. Pitt was no longer Minis- 
ter. In consequence of this, Mr. Pitt wrote a 
letter to the Duke of Portland, in which he said, 
he was ready to meet His Grace to arrange an 
Administration on fair and equal terms. 

The morning on which this letter was to be 
considered, Mr. Fox could not be brought from 
St. Anne's HilL From this circumstance Mr. 
Edmund Burke had alone the direction of the 
Duke of Portland, and he prevailed on the Duke 
to write an answer to Mr. Pitt, requesting an ex- 
planation of the expression, '•' Fair and equal 
terms/' This occasioned delay; the courage of 



53 

Mr. Pitt and his friends revived, and they broke 
oft* the negotiation. Mr. Pitt afterwards said in 
the House of Commons, that when he was called 
on to explain what he meant by the expression, 
11 Fair and equal terms," he took it for granted, 
that the Duke of Portland and his friends intend- 
ed that the arrangements should not be made on 
fair and equal terms. I mention this anecdote, 
as another instance how often little circumstances 
influence important events. Had Mr. Fox been 
present, his good sense would have pointed out to 
bim the advantage of closing with Mr. Pitt, al- 
most on any terms. He must have been sensible 
that he could not long continue in the position 
which he then held. He must « have seen that 
Lord North's partisans were every day deserting 
him ; and that those who remained, were not ac- 
customed to bear the privations of an opposition 
camp. A coalition with Mr. Pitt and the King's 
friends, would have jumbled all parties together. 
It would have relieved Mr. Fox from the odium 
which he had incurred by his union with Lord 
North; perhaps it might even in some degree 
have conciliated the King, who was very uneasy 
at the continuance of the contest. All these ad- 
vantages were lost by Mr. Fox not choosing to 
come to town from St. Anne's Hill. 

In the month of March 1784, Mr. Pitt dissolv- 
ed the Parliament. The elections were every- 
where favourable to him; and in the new Parlia- 
ment Mr. Pitt had a decided majority. 



54 



I will here close my chronological recollections. 
Whatever other remarks I may make, they shall 
be on subjects as they happen to recur to me, 



CHAPTER II. 

From the Meeting of Parliament in March 1784, 
to the Commencement of the French Revolution 
inJuhj 1789, 

In 1786, Mr. Pitt established the Sinking 
Fund. While this measure was coupled with the 
pacific system, it was extremely beneficial to the 
country. It raised the funds ; it increased the va- 
lue of land, and of every thing else; in one word, 
it gave to every man the prosperity of a rising 
market. But when the pacific system was aban- 
doned, the measure became injurious, because it 
enabled the Minister to increase the national debt 
with more rapidity. 

Another measure which Mr. Pitt brought for- 
ward soon after, was a commercial treaty with 
France. This measure was also highly benefi- 
cial. I have always considered the Methuen 
Treaty with Portugal as injudicious. At the time 
when it was made, viz. 1703, there were circum- 
stances which might perhaps have rendered it ad- 
visable* but the perseverance in it has been un- 



55 

wise. To form a correct opinion on this subject, 
it is necessary to look back to the commercial 
state of Europe in the seventeenth century. At 
the commencement of that century, Holland pos- 
sessed the East India Trade, the fisheries, and 
the carrying tracte of Europe. France was the 
principal manufacturing country. England had 
neither fisheries, nor the carrying trade, nor the 
East India trade, nor the West India trade, nor 
any colonies of importance; she had hardly any 
manufacture for exportation, except that of wool. 
She had neither the silk manufacture, nor the 
linen, nor the cotton, nor the hardware. Until 
after the great rebellion in 1641, England could 
scarcely be considered as a commercial State. 
Oliver Cromwell destroyed the freight trade of 
Holland, by the Navigation Act. The fisheries of 
Holland were ruined by other circumstances; 
first, from a considerable part of Europe having 
become Protestant, and relinquished the observe 
ance of fast- days; secondly, from the improve- 
ments in agriculture, which furnished men with 
other animal food than fish during the winter sea- 
son ; thirdly, from the establishment of the cod 
fishery on the banks of Newfoundland. The cod 
being a large fish, retains the quality of animal 
food, though it has been a long while salted; 
while the small size of the herring renders it in 
a short time a mere lump of salt. These circum- 
stances have ruined the Dutch fishery. When 
we read in Sir William Temple's works, that the 



$6 

Dutch employed three thousand vessels in the 
herring fishery, we hardly credit it ; but other au- 
thors of that period give the same account. 

The French were at this time the principal ma- 
nufacturers of Europe. In Sir William Temple's 
account of what passed between himself and the 
Dutch Ministers, while he was negotiating the 
Commercial Treaty with Holland in 1668, he tells 
us, that one of the Dutch Commissioners propo- 
sed, that England and Holland should confede- 
rate, not to consume the manufactures of France ; 
and then, added the Dutch Commissioner, France 
will soon die of a consumption. But the Grand 
Pensionary, De Witt, would not listen to the sug- 
gestion. Perhaps he had little reliance either on 
the steadiness or good faith of Charles II. And 
he recollected the assistance which France had 
given to Holland, during the early struggles of 
that republic. It is a little curious that Buona- 
parte should have thought of the same means for 
destroying our opulence as had occurred to the 
Dutch Statesman in 1668. When we relinquish- 
ed the consumption of French wines, and took in 
exchange the wine of Portugal, we exchanged 
commerce with twenty millions of industrious, 
opulent, and therefore much consuming people, 
for commerce with two millions of idle, poor, and 
consequently but little consuming people. As 
we have ourselves no growth of wine, we confer 
a considerable benefit on that nation from which 
we take our wine ; and it must be our object that 



57 

the wine which we consume should be paid foi 
in our manufactures. I doubt whether Portugal 
takes manufactures from us to the value of the 
wine which we take from her. I consider the 
Brazil trade as distinct from the trade with 
Portugal. 

When the Methuen Treaty was made, it was 
our object to excite every nation in Europe against 
the Bourbons. But I doubt the w r isdom of per- 
severing in this measure. If we took our wines 
and brandies from France, she would be under 
the necessty of taking large quantities of our 
manufactures in return. But there is another cir- 
cumstance which deserves consideration : if we 
took wines and brandies from France, it would be 
extremely inconvenient to France to be at war 
with England : a large proportion of her popula- 
tion would be distressed by such a war ; for wine 
and brandy are not only a manufacture in France, 
the growth of wine affects a great part of her agri- 
culture. The principle of the commercial treaty 
with France was judicious. I regret that it could 
not have been extended further; but perhaps the 
jealousy of the mercantile interest in England ren- 
dered such an extension impracticable. 

The great political measure of 1787 was the 
invasion of Holland by a Prussian army, with the 
concurrence of the British Government. The 
measure was attended with success : the expense 
to England amounted to no more thon 550,000/. 
and it was applauded by the Opposition, which 

F 



58 

had at that time as its leader a member of the 
Bentinck family. But I doubt the wisdom of 
this measure ; it was extremely perilous ; and if 
the influence which Austria at that time possessed 
in the French cabinet had not induced that go- 
vernment to neglect its obvious interests, it must 
have been followed by a general war, the burden 
of which would have fallen upon England. 

During the latter part of the contest with Ame- 
rica, those who were eager for continuing the war 
had chosen to commence hostilities against Hol- 
land : perhaps they had resolved on this from a 
reliance on their influence over the Stadtholder. 
In this reliance they were not disappointed : he 
betrayed his masters, and kept their fleets unem- 
ployed. On the re-establishment of peace, the 
Dutch felt strong resentment against the Stadt- 
holder, and put some affronts upon him ; it would 
have been wise in him to have submitted for a 
time to those humiliations ; the displeasure of the 
Dutch nation would have gradually subsided : 
but this did not suit the proud imperious mind of 
the Stadtholder's wife. She was sister to the 
King of Prussia, and had been educated in senti- 
ments ill suited to a republic. Under the direc- 
tion of Lord Malmsbury, the British minister at 
the Hague, a Prussian army invaded Holland. It 
is true they succeeded, but their robberies and 
plunder have never been forgotten by the Dutch; 
the remembrance of them destroyed all affection 
of the Dutch people to the family of the Stadt- 



59 

holder. The invasion of the Prussian army pro- 
duced another bad consequence : it showed how 
easily Holland might be over-run ; it destroyed 
her strength by destroying her reputation for 
strength. 

In the autumn 1788, King George III. was, 
for the first time, afflicted with that malady which 
became constant during the last ten years of his 
life. I shall speak on this subject with much re- 
luctance, because I am aware that my opinions 
are not the same with those of the generality of 
my countrymen. I love the magistracy of roy- 
alty, because I think it highly beneficial to the 
people : it protects them from the usurpation of 
oligarchs, a government, of all others, the most 
oppressive. Oligarchy is also the government 
which Englishmen have the most reason to fear, 
for the proprietors and patrons of boroughs have 
already usurped a power which the law has for- 
bid them to possess ; if they are allowed to extend 
that power a little further, royalty, a house of 
lords, and a house of commons, may remain as 
splendid pageants, but the real efficient power 
w ill be in that usurping oligarchy, the patrons and 
proprietors of boroughs. I love royalty as a ma- 
gistracy, not as a property. With these senti- 
ments, I acknowledge that I thought that after 
the King's first seizure he should never have been 
allowed to exercise the powers of royalty. Let me 
suppose that a chief justice of the King's Bench 
were afflicted with the same disease, and for the 



60 

same period ; would any man think that he ought 
to be replaced in the exercise of his office ? Yet 
surely the judicious exercise of the magistracy of 
royalty is of more importance to the country than 
the judicious exercise of the powers of a chief jus- 
tice. But these sentiments are no longer fashion- 
able ; German principles have now brought us to 
consider royalty as property. 

I think the interregnum which took place du- 
ring the King's illness was highly injurious to the 
country. I think the same of Mr. Pitt's proposal 
to establish regency in the Prince of Wales with 
curtailed prerogatives. I regret that the minds of 
Englishmen have been accustomed to the idea ; 
I fear that mischief may hereafter follow from it. 
But I will have done with reflections which I know 
will be odious : I will now speak of the matter 
historically. 

Mr. Fox was out of England when the King 
was taken ill : Lord Thurlow, the Chancellor, 
availed himself of this circumstance; he studious- 
ly sought intercourse with the Prince of Wales, 
that he might have an opportunity of conveying 
to him his sentiments on His Royal Highnesses 
situation. He recommended to him to lie upon 
his oars, to show no impatience to assume the 
powers of royalty. He pointed out to him, that, if the 
King's illness were of any considerable duration, 
the regency must necessarily devolve on him. I 
believe Lord Thurlow and Mr. Pitt were not at 
that time on the best terms : Mr. Pitt's conduct 



61 

in the prosecution of Mr. Hastings had been dis- 
approved of by Lord Thurlow, and this disappro- 
bation ultimately produced an ill humour which 
occasioned a separation ; but this ill humour had 
not at that time risen to such a height, as to pre- 
vent amicable intercourse between them ; and I 
have very little doubt but that if the Prince of 
Wales had listened to Lord Thurlow, the mea- 
sures recommended by Mr. Pitt and the Chan- 
cellor would have been the same. But Mr. Fox 
returned from abroad ; the Prince gave himself 
up to his guidance : the injudicious advice of Lord 
Loughborough, the incautious language of Charles 
Fox, and the folly and arrogance of Mr. Burke 
and others, brought Mr. Pitt to declare, that aL 
though the regency should be vested in the Prince 
of Wales, it should be vested in him with dimi 
nished powers. 

1 know the Chancellor, Lord Thurlow, has 
been much abused for his conduct on this occa- 
sion ; some members of the Opposition have gone 
so far as to say that he would have acted against 
the opinion of Mr. Pitt, if the Opposition would 
have engaged to continue him in the office of 
Chancellor : but I do not believe this assertion to 
be true. Trimming was not congenial to the 
character of Lord Thurlow. If such a negotia- 
tion had ever taken place between Lord Thurlow 
and the Opposition, Mr: Fox must have been 
privy to it : I never heard it intimated by him, 
and I think I should have heard it intimated if 

f 2 



62 

such a negotiation ever had existed ; for, after my 
return to the House of Commons in 1796, 1 had, 
at different times, much confidential intercourse 
with Charles Fox, and the subject of the regency 
was frequently mentioned. I believe that Lord 
Thurlow acted with great integrity : he once told 
me that if it had been ultimately necessary to pass 
the Regency Bill framed by Mr. Pitt, he should 
have acceded to it with great reluctance. 



CHAPTER III. 

Causes of the French Revolution. 

The French Revolution took place in the 
month of July 1789. I date its commencement 
from the day on which the Etats Generaux voted 
themselves to be the National Assembly, and 
Louis XVI. accepted royalty under the form of 
government then voted. The causes which led 
to the French Revolution were many and va- 
rious ; they have been differently stated, accord- 
ing to the passions and interests of the different 
parties ; but people are now beginning to view 
them calmly, and, when the passions of those who 
have been involved in the contest have a little 
more subsided, we shall be able to see them 
distinctly. 



63 

I have said that the causes which gradually 
operated to produce the French Revolution were 
many ; I will endeavour to enumerate them as 
succinctly as I can : I shall distinguish them as 
principal and as secondary. I consider those 
causes as principal which must, at some time or 
other, have necessarily produced a revolution ; 
while I shall call those causes secondary which 
only accelerated it. Among the principal causes, 
I shall give the first place to the distinction of 
noblesse and bourgeoisie. How or when this dis- 
tinction arose, it is difficult to say : Did the Franks 
bring it with them when they took possession of 
lands in France ? or was it introduced at a later 
period in French history ? It does not seem to 
have been a necessary consequence of the feudal 
tenure. Tacitus, in his most valuable treatise, 
De Moribus Germanorum, has this expres- 
sion, lieges ex Nobilitate sutnant. If the Ger- 
mans elected their kings from among the nobles, 
the distinction of noble, and ignoble, must have 
existed before the Franks quitted their native soil. 
Bui the question carries us back to such remote 
ages, that I will not pretend to form an opinion on 
the subject. If this supposition is well founded, 
it is probable that the nobles among the German 
tribes were few in number, that they were not 
numerous originally in France, and that they did 
not possess those privileges and preferences which 
rendered the distinction so disgusting at the pe- 
riod immediately preceding the Revolution. The 



64 

French lawyers do not recognise more than two 
or three hundred families as being of this ancient 
nobility, and they distinguish these families by 
the name of Les Families Historiques ; the rest 
of the French nobles obtained the distinction at 
different periods, either by grant or by purchase ; 
but by what ever means they obtained this dis- 
tinction of noblesse, they were permitted to enjoy 
the same preferences as had been allowed to the 
more ancient nobles. At what time the kings of 
France first assumed the right of granting no- 
blesse, I cannot say. But from granting, they 
deviated into the practice of selling it ; and from 
thence gradually established, that noblesse should 
always accompany certain employments which 
they conferred. It is probable, that at first the 
sale of noblesse was not very frequent. It became 
more frequent in the reign of Louis XIV. ; and 
the practice had been so much increased during 
the reign of Louis XV. that, a few years before 
the Revolution, it was computed that there were 
four thousand employments purchasable, every 
one of which gave noblesse. These nobles by 
purchase enjoyed all the privileges of the ancient 
noblesse ; they were exempt from taille, corvees, 
&c. &c. These exemptions from taxes increased 
the burdens on those who were not noble : for 
example, if a hundred thousand francs were to be 
raised by taille on a district, and half the lands 
in that district belonged to nobles, the nobles were 
exempt, but the king was not to lose his revenue ; 



the whole sum, therefore, was to be raised on 
those proprietors who were not noble. I do not 
know whether the same rule extended to corvees 
and the other taxes from which the nobles were 
exempt. 

But there was another circumstance still more 
offensive to the bourgeoisie. The nobles had al- 
ways claimed a preference for advancement in the 
army, the navy, the church, and the parliaments. 
About the middle of the reign of Louis XV. the 
Minister of War represented to the King, that 
the nobles were become so numerous, that if com- 
missions in the army and the navy were not kept 
exclusively for them, they must starve, as their 
rank prevented them from entering into com- 
merce, or from becoming advocates or physicians. 
On this representation a rule was adopted, that 
no man should receive a commission in the army, 
except he could produce proofs of noblesse ; and 
I believe that although this rule might sometimes 
be relaxed as to lieutenants, it was always observ- 
ed in respect to those who were raised to the rank 
of captains. I have also heard that this rule was 
not observed in the ten regiments of artillery : in 
the artillery they began as cadets, and the educa- 
tion was so severe, that the nobles were unwilling 
to enter into that service. I believe the same rule 
was soon after adopted respecting admissions into 
their parliaments: probably the same rule existed 
as to advancement to elevated stations in the 
church: for I recollect, that, diniog one day at a 



66 

French nobleman's, in company with an ecclesias- 
tic, whom I saw to be of some consequence; after 
he had retired I asked the nobleman if that ecclesi- 
astic were noble : " Certainly," said he, " did I not 
tell you that he was abbot of such an abbey?" 
On which I said, " why, are all abbots noble V f 
He replied, " I do not know that there is any law 
which prevents men who are not noble from be- 
coming abbots; but it never happens that abbeys 
are conferred on those who are not noble." These 
circumstances contributed much to render the dis- 
tinction of noblesse more odious to the rest of the 
nation; such exclusive preference must at all times 
have been offensive ; but the disgust was increased 
as the nobles became more numerous, and the 
bourgeoisie more opulent and intelligent : in fact, 
this distinction divided the nation into two parts. 
The bourgeoisie felt themselves a degraded class. 
Observing men perceived the increase of this dis- 
gust. About the time of the commercial treaty 
between England and France, Mons. de Ver- 
gennes, then Minister of France, remarked to a 
French friend of mine, that France was become 

i commercial. Mons. de Vergennes probably 
wished to keep France in the same state in which 
it had been during the reigns of Louis XIV. and 
Louis XV.; and saw that the increasing opulence 
of France, in consequence of its commerce, would 
render the distinction of noblesse intolerable. 

I have no hesitation in Assigning to this dis- 
tinction of nob ind bourgeoisie the first place 



among the principal causes of the French Revo- 
lution. 

I rank feudal burdens as the second principal 
cause. France, like most of the other European 
governments, was originally a feudal state. 

In feudal govern mens, the burdens imposed on 
the military vassals were so heavy, that there was 
little room for further taxation. My knowledge 
of feudal governments is chiefly drawn from the 
English law. In England, I believe, few taxes 
were imposed on those who held by military ser- 
vice, before the reign of Henry II. That mo- 
narch made a great change in the feudal govern- 
ment, by substituting, under the name of escuage, 
a money payment in lieu of military service. Per- 
haps this change was at first convenient to the 
military tenant; but the demand of this escuage 
was so frequently renewed, that the payment in 
time became oppressive, and the vassals of the 
Crown compelled the King to consent, that the 
sum to be paid under the name of escuage, should 
be fixed by Parliament. Sir Edward Coke says, 
that those who held by knight's service were ex- 
empt from tallium, or taille ; but those who held 
by other services seem to have been always liable 
to money payments, under the name of tallages. 
It was gradually established, that all money pay- 
ments demanded from the people should be fixed 
by Parliament. The clergy were exempt from 
this rule : they voted their taxes in convocation. 
Perhaps the claim of the House of Commons, that 



68 

all taxes should originate with them, arose from 
this circumstance, that the principal grants of mo- 
ney were tallages, from which the military tenants 
were exempt. It was therefore reasonable that 
the Commons should fix what they were able to 
pay, and the military tenants retain only the right 
of dissenting. 

As Edward I. was the first of our monarchs 
who preserved our records, all conjectures in res- 
pect to taxation, after the Conquest until the reign 
of Edward I. must be very hazardous. The 
Parliaments, under our early Norman Kings, con- 
sisted, most probably, only of bishops, mitred 
abbots, priors, and the great military vassals. In 
the time of Henry III. a considerable change 
seems to have been made in the nature of Parlia- 
ments. Bodies of the commonalty were autho- 
rized by the King's writ to send representatives to 
that assembly : it is doubtful whether the Earl of 
Leicester or the King first introduced this practice. 
The idea that bodies of the commonalty should 
send representatives to Parliament was probably 
adopted from the right which had been allowed 
to the mitred abbots and priors: these men sat in 
Parliament as representatives of aggregate bodies 
ofe sties: if the representative of an aggre- 

gate body of ecclesiastic i might with propriety bit 
in Parliament, there was no reason why the r pre- 
sentative of an bodj of the commonalty 

Ju not sit there. But whoever first introdu d 
the practice, king! soon saw the advantage they 



69 

could derive from it; they saw that these repre- 
sentatives of bodies of the commonalty would 
support them against their powerful vassals, and 
they selected for the exercise of this right those 
boroughs which were most dependent on them- 
selves. It is on this ground that I account for so 
many members of the House of Commons being 
sent by Cornish boroughs. During the reign of 
Henry III. his brother Richard, king of the Ro- 
mans, was Earl of Cornwall ; on the death of Ri- 
chard, his only son Edmund became Earl of 
Cornwall, and he dying without issue in the 28th 
of Edward I. that earldom escheated to the 
crown. The earldom of Cornwall has therefore 
belonged to the royal family from the earliest 
period at which representatives from bodies of the 
commonalty have been sent to Parliament. My 
opinion on this subject is confirmed, from observ- 
ing how many other towns, out of the county, 
but within the earldom of Cornwall, or, as it is 
now called, the duchy, have been summoned to 
send representatives to Parliament. I will enu- 
merate them : Plymouth, Plympton, Dartmouth, 
Totness, Oakhampton, Berealston, Tavistock, 
Ashburton; to which may be added Newton Bu- 
shel, which formerly sent members: all these bo- 
roughs, though out of the county, were within 
the domains of the Earls of Cornwall. 

I know it has been said, that these towns in 
Cornwall and Devon might formerly have been 
places of great trade ; but whoever is acquainted 



70 

With the county of Cornwall must see that this 
supposition is ill founded. Why did the borough 
of Tregony send members to Parliament as early 
as the reign of Edward I. while the city of West- 
minster sent no members till the reign of Edward 
VI. ? The reason is obvious : Tregony was a 
small town dependent on the Earls of Cornwall ; 
while the city of Westminster, until the Reforma- 
tion, was under the influence of the great Abbot 
of Westminster. I think this opinion is strength- 
ened by another fact mentioned in English his- 
tory. The first occasion on which the represen- 
tatives of the Commons appear to have been 
brought forward was in support of the King's pow- 
er. Henry III. had confiscated the estates of the 
Bishop of Winchester by Act of Parliament. 
The Pope wrote a letter to the King and Parlia- 
ment, signifying that he would excommunicate 
them if they did not restore to the Bishop his pro- 
perty. The King and the Lords answered this 
letter with great humility : they said that they 
were very willing to comply with His Holiness's 
wishes, but that the representatives of the Com- 
mons refused to concur. If the histories of other 
European nations arc examined, I believe the 
same cause will have been found every where to 
have operated to occasion representatives from 
bodies of the commonalty to be sent to the states 
of those countries, viz. to support the Kingagainst 
the power of his great vassals. 

I have deviated to this short view of the Eng- 



71 

lish Government, because I think that, in those 
distant times, the principles of government in 
England and in France were very nearly the 
same. Until the reign of Charles VII. King of 
France, I believe taxes were always imposed in 
France by the Etats Generaux. On the acces- 
sion of that Prince, he found the English and the 
Burgundians in possession of the greater part of 
his dominions : it was, therefore, out of his power 
to assemble the Etats Generaux ; yet money was 
necessary. He imposed taxes by his sole autho- 
rity ; and those who were attached to him sub- 
mitted to the innovation, because they saw that 
the situation of the King required them to acqui- 
esce. As it was necessary that the$e taxes should 
be made known to the people, he registered them 
in his principal Court of Justice, the Parliament 
of Paris : thence the usage in France, that taxes 
should be imposed by the King's sole authority, 
and registered in his Parliament. Charles VII. 
introduced also another innovation : he raised a 
regular army, which he kept constantly on foot. 
Before that time, the armies of France, like those 
of other feudal nations, had been composed of 
military vassals, or of soldiers furnished by con- 
tract ; but these were found unequal to the task 
of expelling the English and Burgundians. From 
the reign of Charles VII. we must date these two 
great alterations, viz. taxes imposed by the King's 
sole authority, and a standing army. Both usages 
were uniformly persevered in till the time of the 
Revolution. 



72 

I rank the continuance of feudal burdens on 
lands, and the power usurped by their Kings of 
imposing taxes by their own sole authority, as 
the second and third principal causes of the French 
Revolution. Were I called on to say which of 
the principal causes operated the most, I should 
certainly say, hatred to the privileges and to the 
distinctions of the Noblesse : I should give the 
second place to the aversion to feudal burdens,. 
F think the power which the King had usurped 
of imposing taxes by his sole authority, had not 
excited so much aversion as those circumstances 
which I have above enumerated. The power 
which the King had assumed of imposing taxes 
by his own sole authority, w T as much checked by 
the power which the Parliament claimed of refus- 
ing to register those taxes ; and if the Parliament 
of Paris had exercised with integrity the right 
which they had acquired of registering edicts for 
taxes, perhaps the disuse of taxation by the Etats 
Generaux might have been tolerated. But the 
Parliament exercised this power dishonestly ; they 
employed it for no other purpose than that of pro- 
tecting the Nobles from the payment of taxes, 
thereby throwing most intolerable burdens on 
those who were not of the order of Noblesse. 
The exemptions might have been tolerable while 
there were only two hundred families who claim- 
ed them ; but when by sale, or improvident grants, 
these families were augmented to thirty thousand, 
the distinction could no longer be endured : the 
abolition of privileges became necessary. 



73 

I consider the fourth principal cause to have 
been the general wish which prevailed to destroy 
the power and wealth of the Church. Perhaps 
the Reformation took place at an earlier period in 
England than in France, in consequence of the 
opulence of the Clergy having been so much 
greater in the one country than in the other. There 
had been some little diminution of Church 
property in England by the confiscation of the 
property of the alien priories in the time of Henry 
V. ; but the wealth of the Church remained so 
great, that when the Reformation took place in 
the reign of Henry VIII, the people saw the con- 
fiscation of Church property with pleasure. 

I cannot, in compliance with the opinions of 
French Royalists, rank the writings of the philo- 
sophers as a principal cause • but' I will so far ac- 
quiesce in their opinions as to admit that these 
writings may have accelerated the Revolution, 
and I will therefore place them among the secon- 
dary causes : for what were these writings ? In 
fact, they were only efforts to bring the people 
to feel, that the finest country in Europe was 
kept in a degraded state, in consequence of the 
existence of these abuses. I have said, the finest 
country in Europe. I will ask any man, who is 
well acquainted with France, whether in point of 
soil, of climate, variety of valuable productions, 
and the advantage of local situation, there is any 
country in Europe superior to it? If France, 
therefore, at the time of the Revolution, was in- 

c2 



ferior to any other country in Europe, it must 
have been owing to faults existing in her govern- 
ment. In one word, the unimproved state of 
France was the consequence of that feudalism 
which had been suffered to remain after the 
causes which had given birth to it had ceased to 
exist. 

Perhaps other causes, which led to the Revolu- 
tion, might be considered as principal ; but for the 
present I will content myself with those which I 
have enumerated. I will now mention some other 
secondary causes. I consider the policy of Louis 
XIV. in bringing all the French Nobility to at- 
tend his Court, as having contributed to the Re- 
volution. The feudal lord is the oppressor of his 
vassals ; but he sometimes confers kindnesses on 
them. When he was removed from the country 
to the court, he was known to his vassals only 
through his agents : oppressions were continued, 
and kindnesses withdrawn. The heavy taxes, 
imposed in consequence of the unnecessary wars 
of Louis XIV. had rendered France more sensi- 
ble of her grievances, and more disposed to inno- 
vation. 

Before the French Revolution, half the land in 
France was either occupied by Ma itres- valets or 
Metayers. If by the first, the land must be con- 
sidered as in the occupation of the proprietor him- 
self ; if occupied by Metayers, they paid their 
rent in a moiety of the produce. In either case, 
the residence of the Lord at Versailles must ne- 



75 

cessarily have diminished the produce. It is ad- 
mitted, even by zealous ultra-royalists, that the 
lands in France at this time produce one third 
more than they did before the Revolution ; and 
that this is the consequence of the lands being 
either cultivated by the proprietor himself, or un- 
der his immediate inspection. 

Among the secondary causes which led to the 
French Revolution, I place the treaty of alilance 
between France and Austria, about the beginning 
of the year 1756. The Duke de Choiseuil was 
the adviser of this treaty : he was a native of Lor- 
raine, and as such was by birth a subject of the 
new House of Lorraine-i\ustria. This treaty was 
very beneficial to Austria ; for it not only secured 
to her the quiet possession of the Netherlands, 
but left her at full liberty to. pursue all her projects 
of aggrandizement in Germany. But it was high- 
ly injurious to France ; for it placed out of reach 
the only power against which her army could 
with propriety be employed. The diminution of 
the army seemed a necessary consequence. Per- 
haps a still more important consequence followed 
it : perhaps from that time the army became less 
the object of attention with the Crown. I am 
aware that the reverse of this was the immediate 
consequence ; that France sent an army into Ger- 
many to support the views of Austria during the 
seven years' war ; but when that war was termi- 
nated, I believe that the consequences which I 
have above stated actually took place. 



7G 

If the French Ministers wished to preserve 
France in the state in which she had existed dur- 
ing the reigns of Louis XIV. and Louis XV. the 
alliance with Austria was an unwise measure. I 
will pause for a moment to consider the seven 
years' war. 

In this war France and England both acted 
against their natural interests. The object of 
Austria was the diminution of the power of Prus- 
sia ; but it was the interest of France to support 
the petty Princes of Germany, as the means of 
preventing the aggrandizement of Austria. On 
the other hand, it was the interest of England that 
Austria should extinguish those petty Princes. 
By possessing the sovereignty of the whole of 
Germany, Austria would have been more able to 
keep down the power of France ; and England 
had herself nothing to fear from the power of Aus- 
tria : but the Elector of Hanover had an interest 
directly opposite to that of the King of Great Bri- 
tain. As Elector of Hanover, it was his interest 
to check the power of Austria, and to prevent her 
from making new acquisitions in Germany. 
France sacrificed her interest to her alliance with 
Austria ; and England sacrificed to the views and 
wishes of the Elector of Hanover. Bi.it this 
treaty with Austria was afterwards followed by a 
matrimonial alliance, which was productive of far 
greater mischiefs to France than those which I 
have now enumerated. 

About 1768 Russia, the ally of Austria, attack- 



77 

ed the Turks. Good policy would have indu 
ced France to support the Turks, and to prevent 
Russia from making new acquisitions on that side. 
But the alliance with Austria restrained France 
from acting agreeably to her obvious interests, 
About 1772 Austria, Russia, and Prussia, form- 
ed the plan of dismembering Poland. It was the 
interest of France to prevent it ; and she had the 
means of preventing it. If her armies had enter- 
ed the Austrian Netherlands, the plan would have 
been abandoned. In the beginning of the year 
1778, Austria attempted to get possession of the 
Electorate of Bavaria. Prussia and other Ger- 
man Princes resisted this attempt. The interests 
of France required her to assist those German 
Princes ; instead of which, she paid no attention 
to the German contest, but without any provoca- 
tion commenced an unnecessary war with Eng- 
land. As a principal in the treaty of Utrecht, 
France may fairly be considered a guarantee that 
the arrangements of that treaty should be observ- 
ed. But she suffered the Emperor Joseph to vio- 
late the rights secured to Holland by that treaty. 

I place the Treaty of Alliance between France 
and Austria in 1756, as one of those circumstan- 
ces which accelerated the French Revolution. 
The part which France took in the war between 
England and her Colonies, I consider as another 
cause. That contest necessarily produced, through 
the whole of Europe, a discussion as to the rights 
of governors and governed ; a discussion which 



78 

governors ought to wish to avoid. France took 
part with the governed. Her conduct encourag- 
ed their claims ; and on the return of the French 
army from America, both officers and soldiers were 
actuated by a knowledge and love of liberty un- 
known before that time in France. The discus- 
sions produced by the American war, and the sen- 
timents with which the French army returned 
from America, had, I believe, more influence in 
accelerating the Revolution, than all the publica- 
tions of French philosophers antecedent to the 
commencement of the American contest. I use 
the expression accelerating, because the French 
Revolution was the result of natural causes. 
These I call principal ; while I consider those 
which only accelerated as secondary causes. I 
place the vacillating, unsteady mind of Louis XVI. 
and the haughty imperious character of Marie 
Antoinette, among the other secondary causes. 
When Louis XVI. in July 1789, acknowledged 
the Etats Generaux to be the National Assembly, 
and consented to be King according to the Con- 
stitution then established, he virtually relinquish- 
ed those powers which had been exercised by 
Louis XIV. and Louis XV. ; but the restless am- 
bitious mind of Marie Antoinette, educated from 
early years in the love of arbitrary power, and ab- 
horrence of the principles of liberty, could never 
abandon the wish of re establishing the ancien re- 
gime. She influenced her husband to endeavour 
to restore it ; and his struggles to effectuate her 



wishes, were a violation of that faith which he 
had pledged when he accepted royalty under the 
new constitution. 

The ultra-royalists all consider the late Duke 
of Orleans as having contributed in a very high 
degree to the Revolution. I am not quite certain 
that this opinion is well founded. He had un- 
doubtedly strong resentments against the Queen, 
who had done him great personal injuries; but I 
cannot easily bring myself to believe that he wish- 
ed to overturn that dynasty of which he was him- 
self a member. It is said that he spent large 
sums of money in exciting the people to insurrec- 
tion, but there is no proof of this. He was an 
avaricious man, and as such not likely to waste 
his own money. I believe his property consisted 
chiefly in land, and not in money. It must have 
been difficult to convert this land into money, or 
even to borrow a large sum upon it. There is no 
proof that any sum of money was ever so raised s 
if raised to a large amount, it must have been 
known, and a small sum could have produced no 
important effects. 

I have heard the sensuality and crapulous life 
of Louis XV. mentioned as having hastened the 
French Revolution; but I doubt whether this 
supposition is to any great degree well founded. 
I travelled through a considerable part of France 
in 1772, and I could no where discover that the 
King was odious : on the contrary, it seemed to 
me as if every Frenchman considered his own 



80 

personal importance as connected with the glory 
of Louis XV. The weight of taxes certainly 
had an effect in bringing forward the revolution, 
and these taxes had been in a great degree in- 
creased by the wastefulness of the French court; 
but when we consider the extent of France, her 
productiveness in various valuable articles, her 
local situation in the centre of Europe, the activity 
and ingenuity of her inhabitants, and all her other 
various advantages, we must acknowledge that 
at the death of Louis XV. ample provision might 
have been found for the payment of her taxes 
without destroying the comfort of the people. 

The Parliaments, at the death of Louis XV. 
consisted wholly of Nobles. This was certainly 
the case in respect of the Parliament of Paris, and 
I believe was equally so with the other Parlia- 
ments of France. At the commencement of the 
French Revolution, the financial embarrassments 
of France were certainly greater than they were at 
the death of Louis XV. But even at that period 
they might very easily have been removed, if the 
Parliament of Paris would have acted with inte- 
grity. Mons. de Calonne represented to the Par- 
liament, that it was impossible to go on any long- 
er with the practice of imposing taxes in such a 
manner as that the Nobles should not be affected 
by them. But the Parliament of Paris refused to 
diminish in any degree that exemption from taxes 
which the Nobles had been accustomed to enjoy. 
They even had the folly as well as the injustice to 



81 

vote an abstract resolution, that France was by its 
nature taillable and corveable ; by which they in- 
decently declared, that the taxes from which the 
Nobles were exempt should be those by which a 
large proportion of the public revenue should at 
all times be raised. 

Few people in England have taken the trouble 
to inform themselves accurately of the construc- 
tion and character of the Parliament of Paris. I 
believe that assembly acted with integrity in de- 
ciding causes between man and man. I have 
formed this opinion from this circumstance, that 
the French government could not corrupt the 
Parliament of Paris ; and if the Government could 
not corrupt it, it was not likely that an individual 
would be able to corrupt it. But though the Par- 
liament of Paris was honest in deciding causes 
between man and man, it was very dishonest when- 
ever the exemptions and privileges of the Noblesse 
came in question. Its members were all of the 
order of Noblesse. For the most part they pur- 
chased their situations ; but they purchased gra- 
dually, beginning with the lower situations; as 
officers of the Guards do in England. I believe 
it was as impracticable for a man to begin by 
buying a high station in the French Parliament, 
as it would be for an Englishman not in the army 
to begin by purchasing a company in the Guards. 
They made but a very moderate interest for the 
money they employed in purchasing their situa- 
tions : I have been told very rarely more than sitf 

H 



82 

per cent. Yet they devoted themselves to ac- 
quire that knowledge which was necessary to en- 
able them to discharge their functions. They 
were paid for their trouble by the rank, power, 
and consideration which their situations gave 
them. I know that the Noblesse de FEpee af- 
fected to look down on the Noblesse de la Robe ; 
but the latter always preserved that consequence 
which is the natural result of education and supe- 
rior knowledge. When M. de Calonne found 
that he could not prevail on the Parliament of 
Paris to consent to a more equitable distribution 
of the public burdens, he assembled the Notables; 
but this assembly also was entirely composed of 
Nobles, and M. de Calonne had no better suc- 
cess with this assembly than he had had with the 
Parliament of Paris : he was then under the neces- 
sity of assembling the Etats Generaux. 

I place the conduct of the Parliament of Paris 
among the causes which most materially operated 
to accelerate the Revolution. I rank among the 
same causes the imbecility of M. Necker, both as 
a financier and as a statesman. Perhaps I am 
influenced in my opinion of M. Necker as a finan- 
cier, from a little circumstance which happened 
in the House of Commons. In one of the debates 
which took place during the American war, Mr. 
Burke insulted Lord North by remarking the dif- 
ference of talents between M. Necker and him- 
self: " M. Necker carries on the war without 
imposing the usual war-taxes; while the Noble 



S3 

Lord is every year coming to this House ibr new 
burdens on the people of England." I remem- 
ber Lord North's answer : " Yes, Sir, it is very 
true M. Necker does carry on the war without 
imposing those taxes which are usually imposed 
in France during war; and the time will come 
when France will bitterly regret what M. Necker 
is now doing. He is creating an unfunded debt, 
which must ultimately ruin the public credit of 
France." It turned out as Lord North foretold. 
The Parliament of Paris would not assist M. de 
Calonne to provide for this unfunded debt; he 
was forced to assemble the Etats Generaux; and 
Revolution was the consequence. I know the 
friends of M. Necker have said, that if he had 
continued Minister till the conclusion of the war, 
he would have funded this debt, and provided 
for the payment of the interest. It is possible 
that he might have been able to have done this; 
but he did not remain Minister, and the mischie- 
vous consequence took place. M. Necker would, 
I believe, have been a very able premier Commis 
for a great speculating bank ; but this is a situation 
widely different from that of the financier of a great 
nation. In this latter character, Lord North was 
infinitely his superior. 

I have said that M. Necker was also deficient 
as a statesman. I think I am right. The idea 
that his popularity would enable him to stand as 
mediator between the National Assembly on one 
side, and the Bourbons and the Noblesse on the 



84 

other, was a notion which could never have enter- 
ed into the head of any but the vainest and the 
weakest of men. The National Assembly was 
carried forward by the torrent of popular opinion. 
If a Minister had been able to corrupt the majo- 
rity of that assembly, yet he could not have stop- 
ped the torrent. The Bourbons and the Noblesse 
must ultimately have given way. 

From the joy which the people of Paris ex- 
pressed on the destruction of the Bastile, it might 
be supposed that lettres de cachet were extreme- 
ly odious : but I doubt the correctness of this 
opinion. Lettres de cachet chiefly affected the 
Noblesse and Bourgeois of the higher orders. 

It is possible that many causes besides those 
which I have enumerated contributed to the Re- 
volution ; but I believe that the odious distinction 
of Noblesse and Bourgeoisie, and the privileges 
of the former, the oppressive feudal burdens, and 
the hatred and contempt in which the Clergy 
were justly held by the great body of the people, 
were the circumstances which most contributed 
to it. 

When the National Assembly had once held 
out to the people the hope of relief, the wavering 
irresolute conduct of the King, the known impe- 
rious character of the Queen, and the persuasion 
that the Courtiers and the Noblesse would never 
relinquish the intrigues by which they hoped to 
disappoint the reform of abuses, kept the people 
in constant agitation. The apprehension that they 



85 

should again be subjected to those abuses, drove 
a large portion of the nation mad ; for, during the 
reign of terror, the people seemed to be divided 
into two classes, viz. men actuated by madness, 
and men subdued by fear. 

The high price of corn in 1789 certainly kept 
the people in a state of great agitation. In the 
existing state of the country it had considerable 
effect ; and I must consider this among the acce- 
lerating causes of the Revolution. 

I have said, that the privileges of the Noblesse 
and feudal services were among the principal 
causes of the French Revolution : I believe that 
I am right in this opinion, although I do not pre- 
tend to know how the distinction of Noblesse and 
Bourgeoisie first became established. It is mani- 
fest that France has been conquered at different 
periods by successive swarms from the great 
northern hive. The original language of the con- 
quered nation remains in every part of France, 
under the name of Patois. In different parts of 
the country this Patois is, I believe, a different 
language ; but a language distinct from the French 
is found every where. In the south and the west 
of France, as far north as the Loire, this Patois 
seems to consist of corrupt dialects of the Pro- 
vengat. The Provencal was the language into 
which the Latin first passed when it became cor- 
rupted ; it was the language in which that race of 
poets called Troubadours, celebrated the achieve- 
ments of the heroes of the Crusades ; and from 

H 2 



86 

this language have been formed Italian, Catalan, 
the language of other provinces of Spain, the Pa- 
tois of a large portion of France, and a great part 
of what is called the French language. 

Where the conquered people are extirpated, or 
exterminated, the original language is lost with 
them ; but where the conquered people remain, 
much of the original language remains : in our 
island, the Saxons extirpated, or exterminated, 
the Britons ; few or no British words therefore are 
found in our language. The Normans did not 
extirpate the Saxons ; the present English lan- 
guage is therefore a mixture of the Saxon and 
Norman. I recapitulate these circumstances in 
support of my assertion, that France has at differ- 
ent periods been overrun by northern invaders. 
Conquest naturally brings forward the distinction 
of Noblesse, for the conquerors are Nobles. In 
general, the conquerors gradually blend with the 
conquered ; they become one race, and the dis- 
tinction is lost. 

There is another circumstance which may pos- 
sibly have contributed to keep up the distinction 
of Noblesse in France, and other states of Eu- 
rope. After the fall of the Roman Empire, for 
many ages the strength of armies consisted in 
heavy-armed cavalry. But armour, and a horse 
capable of bearing a man heavily armed, could 
be purchased only by the opulent. This contri- 
buted to increase the distinction between the rich 
and the poor, the noble and the commonalty. 



87 

After all these reflections, I am apt to think 
that the great number of the French Noblesse was 
occasioned by an abusive sale of the distinction. 
But however the distinction arose, it had the ef- 
fect of dividing the people into two classes. All 
who were not noble felt themselves degraded ; 
and as they became rich and intelligent, the de- 
gradation became insupportable. I have men- 
tioned feudal services as another principal cause 
of the French Revolution. I do not pretend to 
have an accurate knowledge of the feudal ser- 
vices in France. They were various in different 
provinces ; for France is but an assemblage of 
different nations conquered by northern invaders 
at different times, and united at different periods; 
but every where feudal services seem to me to 
have been extremely heavy, and even degrading. 
Corvees, that is to say, labour in kind, seem to 
have been payable to the Lord in a great part of 
France. In many districts of France the feudal 
Lord claimed a right to a great part of the succes- 
sion to personal property. It has been thought 
by many antiquarians, that the same right former- 
ly existed in England ; and that the heriot, which 
was in most places the best live beast of the te- 
nant, and in some a still heavier payment, viz. 
that of the best personal chattel, is a remnant of 
this old feudal service, the feudal Lord having 
gradually consented to accept this acknowledg- 
ment of his right instead of the larger portion of 
the moveables which he was entitled to demand. 



88 

This payment of a portion of the moveables to the 
feudal Lord, on the death of a tenant, seems to 
have been prevalent in parts of France, down to 
the period of the Revolution. 

I shall hereafter mention circumstances which 
have contributed gradually to extinguish feudal 
services in England : I cannot find that any such 
circumstances ever existed in France. Immedi- 
ately before the Revolution, it was computed that 
half the land in France was occupied by Metay- 
ers. A great part of France is still occupied in 
the same manner. That I am correct in my opi- 
nion, that the distinction of Noblesse, and aversion 
to feudal services, were the two principal causes 
of the French Revolution, is sufficiently proved 
by the votes which were passed in the celebrated 
sitting of August 1789. Whoever reads the re- 
solutions of that sitting, will see that every vote 
had a tendency to the removal of these two 
grievances. It is possible that some of the votes 
of that night were not sufficiently considered ; but 
the Assembly was driven forward by the general 
wish of the nation. 

I dwell more upon the subject of the French 
Revolution, because every effort has been em- 
ployed to mislead the people of England as to the 
causes of that Revolution. The publications of 
the French emigrants, of Mr. Burke, and the 
great Whig families, and of the agents of Go- 
vernment, were all sent forth with this view ; and 
they succeeded in deluding the country. After a 



89 

struggle of twenty-seven years we find ourselves 
loaded with taxes which we bear with extreme 
difficulty, while the French have obtained the 
great objects which excited them to the Revolu- 
tion ; viz, the abolition of the privileges of No- 
blesse, of feudal services, of the power and wealth 
of the Church ; and have secured all their rights 
by the establishment of national representation. 
It is possible that efforts may yet be made to re- 
establish the ancien regime ; but it is impossible 
that those efforts should succeed. They may 
perhaps establish a military despotism, but they 
cannot re-establish the government that existed 
before the Revolution. How can they re-establish 
their Parliaments ? The privileged Noblesse, of 
which those Parliaments were composed, exist no 
more. They cannot restore to the Church the 
wealth of which it has been deprived ; and if they 
cannot restore its wealth, they cannot re-establish 
its power. The nobles drew much of their wealth 
from their exemptions from taxes, and from the 
receipt of feudal payments, or, as the French call 
them, les droits seigneur eaux. These exemptions 
from taxes, and the feudal payments, have been 
abolished more than thirty years : can any man 
believe that the French nation will submit to see 
them again established ? The French have now 
a national assembly, representative of the people, 
guardian of their rights; they have also an 
army very solicitous for the defence of those 
rights. Let me suppose it possible that the Bour- 



^0 

bons should be able to succeed in changing 
the law of election, and the law for recruit- 
ing the army : still the great difficulty of re-estab- 
lishing the ancien regime would remain. A mili- 
tary despotism might arise, but a Bourbon would 
not be at the head of that despotism, for there is 
not a military character among them. All at- 
tempts made to destroy the present order of things 
in France, would probably terminate in the ex- 
pulsion of the Bourbons, and the destruction of 
the Nobles. 



CHAPTER IV. 

On the Consequences likely to follov) from the 
French Revolution. 

I shall consider this question as it regards 
France itself, and as it regards other nations. I 
am of opinion that a representative government is 
permanently established in France. It is proba- 
ble that the Nobles, who, comprehending every 
age and both sexes, are computed to amount to 
150,000, will endeavour to re-establish their an- 
cient privileges ; they will be assisted in this by 
the clergy and the fanatics. The Bourbon family 
is suspected of wishing them success ; but the 
united efforts of nobles and priests will fail. The 



91 

French nation retains too strong an abhorrence of 
the ancien regime, and too correct a sense of the 
advantages obtained by the Revolution, ever to 
suffer itself to be deprived of those advantages. 
The Kings of Europe confederated to prevent the 
French nation from establishing a representative 
government, but their efforts have failed. 

I have already remarked, that in consequence 
of the French Revolution, their lands, in tillage, 
now yield a produce of one third more than before 
the Revolution. Is this owing to the abolition of 
tithes, or to the abolition of feudal burdens ? or 
must we attribute it to the more equal imposition 
of taxes, and the security from oppression which 
the subject now enjoys ? or is it owing to the di- 
vision of great masses of landed property, former- 
ly possessed by ecclesiastics ? or to the division of 
the landed property of the Nobles, in consequence 
©f the late confiscations and the present law of 
succession ? or shall we say that it is owing to the 
Nobles being obliged to reside on their estates, 
and to superintend their cultivation, in conse- 
quence of their being no longer supported by the 
bounty of a Court ? In what degree these, or 
other causes unknown to me, have occasioned the 
improvement in the produce of their land, I can- 
not pretend to say; but I believe the assertion to 
be true, that the land in France now yields one 
third more than it did before the Revolution. 

I have said, that France has established a re- 
presentative government. In every district, the 



92 

man who pays 300 francs, or 12/. 10s. a year, id 
direct taxes, is entitled to vote. It is calculated, 
that the man who pays this sum annually in di- 
rect taxes, will most commonly have property to 
the value of from 1500 to 1800 pounds sterling; 
this is a sufficient property to create an interest 
in the elector, that taxes should be moderate ; he 
will therefore give his vote with this impression 
on his mind ; and the sentiments of the elected 
will most probably be in unison with those of the 
electors : thus the deputies will really be the re- 
presentatives of their constituents; they will guard 
the people's money ; and it is the money of the 
people which every Government is endeavouring 
to obtain. Every measure which Government 
brings forward in every country, has more or less 
a reference to this end. The nobles will no longer 
be supported by the profusion of a Court; they 
will no longer be exclusively entitled to advance- 
ment in the army or the church ; and their Parlia- 
ments are abolished. Whatever large estates 
may yet remain to individual Nobles, they will 
gradually be divided by the existing law of suc- 
cession : no means of acquiring affluence will re- 
main to the Nobles, except agriculture and com- 
merce. I know that French Nobles have hitherto 
been accustomed to think themselves disgraced 
by engaging in commerce, or by the practice of 
the professions of law and physic ; but these pre- 
judices must be got over. The Nobles will soon 
feel themselves on a level with their fellow-sub- 



93 

jects, and agriculture and commerce will be their 
chief pursuits : thus France will become an agri- 
cultural and commercial nation. It is supposed 
that there is a wish in the Bourbon family to re- 
serve commissions in die army for the Nobles., 
but they will not be able to effectuate this wish. 
While the army is recruited by conscription, 
there will be necessarily found men of education 
among the conscripts; and such men will not sub- 
mit to be considered in a degraded character : they 
will demand advancement according to their 
merits. 

The French Ministers are at this time endea= 
vouring to obtain a change in the law of election, 
and also a change in that law by which the army 
is recruited. By a change in the law of electiom 
they propose to diminish the commercial influence 
in elections. By a change in the law of recruit- 
ing, they wish to prevent a large proportion of 
officers being taken from the ranks. They will 
probably fail in both these attempts. A very large 
proportion of those who are now officers have risen 
from the ranks : even the Generals and Marshals 
who are now seen at the French Court, are well 
aware that they would soon be treated with con- 
tempt if the ancient nobles were advanced to high 
military rank. It has even been said, that the 
disgust of the late Marshal Ney originated in in- 
sults offered to his wife by emigrant Nobles, when 
sh§, presented herself at Court. If the measure 

i 



94 

were persevered in, the Bourbons might fall vic- 
tims to the attempt. 

I have said that a representative government 
is established in France. I do not mean by this, 
that corrections may not be necessary. Perhaps 
the number of the deputies ought to be doubled, 
or at least considerably augmented. The Cham- 
ber of Peers seems to me to be a verv unnatural 
and a very useless part of their government. It 
was probably introduced with a view to imitate 
the English Constitution ; but the French Cham- 
ber of Peers is wholly unlike the English House 
of Lords. The French Chamber, in the course 
of its ordinary proceedings, exercises, I believe, 
no judicial functions (I am aware that the trial of 
Louvel has been assigned to it) ; while the judicial 
power exercised by the English House of Lords 
is the last resort in all cases both of law and equi- 
ty, and on all questions both civil and criminal. 
This jurisdiction has existed in England from the 
most distant times ; and perhaps no tribunal in any 
country was ever less suspected of abusing its 
power. Its decisions are not only acquiesced in 
with respect, but with a confidence that they are 
wise as well as just. 

I have said, that the Parliament of Paris, though 
honest in the decision of causes between man and 
man, was dishonest where the interest of the pri- 
vileged order of Noblesse was in question. The 
English House of Lords has never been even 
suspected of this ; and however remarkable it may 



95 

seem, yet it is true, that in almost every case in 
which the House of Lords has differed in opinion 
from the Courts in Westminster Hall, after-ages 
have generally said that the House of Lords was 
right, and that the Courts at Westminster were 
wrong. 

There is another circumstance in which the 
French Chamber of Peers will with difficulty be 
made to resemble the English House of Lords. 
In the English House of Lords the hereditary- 
Peers are men of the largest landed estates : in 
the French Chamber, if peerage is to be heredi- 
tary and the existing law of succession is to be 
persevered in, the Peers will for the most part be 
poor. I do not quite know the nature of the ma- 
jorats which have been instituted. If it is meant 
that certain portions of land should be inalienably 
annexed to each peerage, and the portions are con- 
siderable, inconvenience will arise from the ina- 
lienability of the land ; and if the portion annexed 
to each peerage is inconsiderable, the institution 
will be of no effect. 

The French Chamber of Peers is a bad imita- 
tion of the English House of Lords. If they 
thought it advisable that every question should 
be discussed in two assemblies, they would per- 
haps have done better to have followed the model 
of the United States of America. A senate and 
a house of representatives would perhaps have an- 
swered all the ends they could have had in view. 
If ever the Bourbons should entertain sentiments 



96 

in unison with those of the nation, the power 
which is now given to the executive government 
of France, of paying the ministers of religion, will 
create an influence which perhaps has never yet 
been fully estimated ; and it will be an influence 
extremely beneficial to the nation. By withhold- 
ing payment, the Government will at all times be 
able to control every ecclesiastic. We hesitate 
to grant emancipation to the Irish Catholics ; and 
the strongest argument urged against this emanci- 
pation is, the danger arising from the influence of 
their priests : but this danger would be nothing if 
:very Catholic priest were paid by the executive 
government. The English government has been 
in the practice of annually distributing a very mo- 
derate sum among the Presbyterian ministers ; I 
believe it never exceeded 20,000/. in any one year: 
yet the influence of this sum has been found high- 
ly beneficial to the Government. wSince the re- 
turn of the Bourbons to France, their executive 
government has not derived much benefit from 
this power : the reason is manifest ; the Bourbons 
have not wished to avail themselves of it. They 
have not been in unison with the wishes of the 
nation on this subject. On the contrary, their 
object has been to re-establish the wealth and the 
power of the Church. The Catholic church, 
wherever it is established conformably to its poli- 
cy, is in truth imperium in imperio. The celi- 
bacy of the clergy was established with this view. 
It was introduced into England by Archbishop 



97 

Lanfranc about the year 1100 : 1 believe it had not 
been insisted on much before, even among the con- 
tinental clergy. The Saxon clergy made great re- 
sistance to it; but it was of much importance to the 
establishment of ecclesiastical power, and Lan- 
franc, by birth an Italian, compelled the English 
clergy to submit to it. Celibacy deprived the cler- 
gy of domestic affections, and reduced them to 
have but one object of solicitude, viz. the extension 
of the power of the Church. In all Catholic coun- 
tries the celibacy of the clergy is insisted on with 
great strictness; I believe it is more difficult to ob- 
tain from Rome a dispensation for a clergyman to 
marry, than it is to obtain a dispensation for an 
uncle to marry his niece, though the latter is pro- 
hibited by the Levitical law. But the influence 
which the executive government of France will 
possess by thus holding the purse from which the 
ministers of religion are to be paid, has not yet 
been felt ; indeed, it has scarcely been noticed. 

When the Bourbons returned in 1814, they 
were accompanied by emigrants who had too 
much influence over them. Had Louis XVIII. 
acted wisely, he would have claimed the crown 
under the title created by the acceptance of Louis 
XVI. in 1789. Claiming as his heir under that 
title, he would have removed all suspicion of his 
having a wish to re-establish the ancien regime ; 
and he ought to have seen that such re-establish- 
ment was impossible. I do not believe that 
Buonaparte was invited to return in 1815 by any 

i2 



98 

political party : but he certainly had received intel- 
ligence that the conduct which the emigrants had 
influenced the Bourbons to hold, had induced 
every part of the nation to receive him back with 
pleasure : the people believed that the odious dis- 
tinction of a privileged noblesse would be re-es- 
tablished : the Protestants thought that they should 
be persecuted for their religious opinions : the 
possessors of national property believed that this 
property would be taken from them : the proprie- 
tors and cultivators of land were apprehensive that 
tithes and feudal burdens would be re-establish- 
ed. I do not believe that the emissaries of Buo- 
naparte instigated the people to these opinions ; 
they arose from the conduct of the emigrants, 
who every where gave out that the ancien regime 
should be re-established. While Louis XVIII. 
rested the constitution on his charter, the people 
saw that their liberties were revocable: had he 
claimed the crown as the heir of Louis XVI. and 
under the title accepted by him in 1789, the peo- 
ple would have been uninfluenced by these sus- 
picions, and the return of Buonaparte could never 
have been attended with success. 

I have said that France will become agricultu- 
ral and commercial : I am aware that this may be 
prevented by the people being prevailed on to be- 
come again a military nation. Although the Bour- 
bons now in existence are not of a military cha- 
racter, yet they will probably wish to give the na- 
tion this turn. Kings naturally wish for standing 



99 

armies, and the Nobles will entertain the hope of 
being advanced in military rank. The great num- 
ber of officers formed in the late war will render it 
mere easy to give the nation this propensity ; and 
should a war break out on the continent of Eu- 
rope, the Bourbons may find the adoption of this 
policy easy. But the pacific system can alone 
confirm the free government of France : it will 
render the French people happy, and contribute 
to the happiness of the other nations of Europe. 

I have been thus insensibly led to the considera- 
tion of the effects which the French Revolution 
will propably have on the other states of Europe : 
but before I proceed to this consideration, I wish 
to explain what I mean by the expression which 
I have used, that representative government is 
permanently fixed in France. I believe this as- 
sertion to be true, but it is the only part of their 
government which is permanently fixed. The 
Chamber of Peers must either be moulded into a 
character very different from that which it now 
exhibits, or it will be extinguished. The Bour- 
bons ever since their return have been suspected 
of wishing to destroy that government of which 
they are the supreme executive magistrates. I 
will not inquire whether this suspicion is well or 
ill founded ; but Caesar's wife must be free even 
from suspicion ; the King must convince the na- 
tion that he has no desire to possess those powers 
which were exercised by Louis XIV. and Louis 
XV.; that his wishes are in unison with those of 



100 

his people ; and from that moment he starts up 
the most powerful monarch in the world. 

I do not believe that there is in France at this 
hour much personal attachment either to a Bour- 
bon or to Buonaparte. The attachment seems to 
me to be to the nation : if there is any exception 
to this sentiment, it is in the military : they re- 
member with pride the victories which the French 
armies obtained in the progress of the Revolution ; 
and those who have served under Buonaparte at- 
tribute their victories to his superior military 
skill. I believe, however, that I say no more 
than the truth when I assert, that the attachment 
of the great body of the people is to the interests 
of the nation : and they consider those interests as 
depending on the permanent establishment of re- 
presentative government. Should I be right in 
this opinion, France and the United States of 
America will both be representative governments. 
The members of the Holy Alliance may cabal 
and intrigue, but they will tremble. In case of a 
war, what resistance can the despots of Germany 
oppose to France ? Their own subjects will be 
their most formidable enemies, for they will wish 
to possess the same advantages as are possessed 
by the people of France. The same sentiments 
will prevail in Spain, Portugal, and Italy. Great 
Britain may perhaps escape the general wreck of 
European monarchies ; its government is still, to 
a considerable degree, representative. Wherever 
an individual, as proprietor or patron, has been 



101 

permitted to usurp the nomination to a seat in 
Parliament, to that extent the House of Commons 
can no longer be considered as the representative 
of the people. But the abuse has not yet extend- 
ed so far but that it may be easily corrected. It 
is much to be lamented that some men have been 
so injudicious as to recommend universal suffrage. 
This would be no remedy ; it would be no reform 
of abuses ; it would be revolution. But men who 
think, see the necessity of correcting abuses; and 
revolution will be prevented by the adoption of 
reform. 

What changes in other nations will be the con- 
sequence of the French Revolution ! We hesitate 
to give an answer to this question : but there are 
certain peculiar circumstances which deserve our 
consideration. Most of the revolutions which we 
read of in history have been the consequence of 
conquest by invaders. Where they have not 
been effected by conquerors, but have been pro- 
duced by the efforts of the people, they have in 
general been confined to the expulsion of the 
reigning dynasty. The insurrection of the Dutch 
against Philip II. was confined to the expulsion 
of that tyrant ; the government was left nearly the 
same as it had existed before. Even in the late 
American war, the Americans did little more than 
deprive the King and his family of the sovereign- 
ty. Each colony was left under its antecedent 
government, the whole being united by a federa- 
tive union. But by- the French Revolution the 



102 

entire government has been swept away. Will 
the example be followed in Spain or in the Span- 
ish colonies? Will it be followed in Germany? 
Intelligence has gone forth. The rights and du- 
ties of governors and governed have been every 
where discussed* Will the Holy Alliance be able 
to defeat the people's efforts ? England may, I 
hope, escape the influence of this Revolution ; a 
very little reform will bring back her House of 
Commons to be really the representative of the 
people. The chief opponents to this reform are 
those great families which have usurped the no- 
mination to seats in Parliament from those bodies 
of the commonalty to which the Crown had origi- 
nally granted it. An event has lately happened 
which has rendered it more necessary for the peo- 
ple of England to turn its immediate attention to 
this reform; I mean the death of His Royal High- 
ness the Duke of Kent, The late Duke of Kent, 
from his sound health and habits of life, was con- 
sidered as a man likely to live to old age. In 
him the nation hoped to avoid the mischiefs aris- 
ing from a long minority. But from the present 
state of the dynasty, on the death of the King and 
his two brothers, a minority must probably take 
place. Who will have the government during 
that minority? The answer is obvious: those 
who nominate the members of the House of 
Commons: and as more than one half of those 
members are nominated by proprietors and pa- 
trons, the people at large may find it difficult to 



103 

protect the rights of an infant sovereign. I may 
be told, perhaps, the three Princes to whom I 
have alluded may live to old age. I sincerely 
wish they may : but men will fear impending dan- 
gers, and it is the duty of Parliament to guard the 
country. 



CHAPTER V. 

Effects produced by the French Revolution in 
England. — Mr. Pitt's Conduct till his Death, 
in 1806. 

I will now consider the effects which the 
French Revolution produced in England. 

The French Revolution certainly created much 
sensation in the people of England. They were 
naturally led to think of the reform of abuses in 
their own government; but I do not think that 
this sentiment was by any means universal : they 
were in a state of prosperity, and those who are in 
a state of prosperity are not desirous of a change 
of government. Mr. Pitt was at that time minis- 
ter with uncommon power, for the Opposition 
was sunk to nothing ; and he seemed to possess 
the confidence of the King. One would be led 
to think from his conduct, that he never felt how 



104 

much the transactions in France required his vigi- 
lant attention. In 1790 he had an unnecessary 
dispute with Spain about a smuggling transaction 
at Nootka Sound. In 1791, he seemed to wish 
for a dispute with Russia about the fortress of 
Oczakow, though it is impossible to believe that 
he could have entertained at that time the idea of 
a serious quarrel with Russia, In 1791 the treaty 
of Pilnitz was negotiated : in this treaty, the inva- 
sion of France w 7 as decided on. I believe Mr. 
Pitt took no part in this treaty ; but the King, as 
Elector of Hanover, approved of it. Mr. Pitt 
acted with great wisdom in determining to take 
no share in hostile operations against France. A 
little reflection ought to have pointed out to every 
Statesman, that if France were attacked by hos- 
tile armies, she would be under the necessity of 
becoming herself an armed nation. 

It is much to be regretted that in 1792 Mr. 
Pitt refused the application of the French govern- 
ment to prevent by his influence the intended hos- 
tilities : I will give Mr. Pitt credit for his wish to 
avoid entering into a war on account of the French 
Revolution ; but he seemed to me never to have 
viewed the French Revolution with the eye of a 
Statesman. He never appeared to feel the effect 
which the agitations in France must have on the 
other States of Europe. He seemed wholly igno- 
rant of the causes of that Revolution. Mr. Pitt 
was a great Parliamentary debater ; perhaps he 
deserves the title of a good financier in times of 



103 

tranquillity ; and from the period when he became 
Minister in 1783, the prosperity of England had 
revived, but he was wholly unacquainted with the 
internal state of other nations. In one word, he 
was a good pilot in calm weather, but not equal 
to conduct the vessel of the State in a stormy sea- 
son. But although 1 cannot consider Mr. Pitt 
as a great Statesman, yet I think that his conduct 
of public affairs for the first nine years of his Ad- 
ministration, viz. from the end of December 
1783, to the end of the year 1792, was highly bene- 
ficial to his country. I think he made several 
mistakes : those mistakes arose from his not 
being sufficiently acquainted with the interests 
and views of foreign nations. He became a Min- 
ister at too early a period of his life, for he was 
made Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1782, when 
he was little more than twenty-three years of age ; 
and he was made First Lord of the Treasury, and 
Prime Minister, on the 20th of December 1783, 
when he was only of the age of twenty-four and 
a half. Before Mr. Pitt had attained the age of 
twenty-five, he was as powerful a debater in Par- 
liament as he ever was in the whole course of his 
life. We have many instances of men who have 
become able public speakers at an early period ; 
but I believe that there is no instance of any man 
who became a great Statesman at the same early 
period. Mr. Fox obtained the summit of that elo- 
quence which he ever attained to, at as early an age 
as Mr. Pitt : Charles Townshend, and Lord Bo- 

K 



106 

lingbroke, were also instances of the practicabili- 
ty of attaining Parliamentary eloquence in early life. 
Perhaps there is no art in which men are so ra- 
pidly improved by practice as in the knack of 
Parliamentary debate. Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox 
had both of them great advantages ; for at his 
outset each was supported by a powerful party. 
This circumstance relieved them from apprehen- 
sions, and confidence is a necessary ingredient in 
a Parliamentary speaker. But though a man may 
become a Parliamentary speaker in early life, he 
cannot become a consummate Statesman at a 
time of life equally early. He must have read 
much ; he must have conversed and reflected 
deeply, before he can be qualified to direct the 
affairs of a great nation. Mr. Pitt had never tra- 
velled. I believe he was imperfectly acquainted 
with the French language. Before I finish these 
reflections, I shall probably show, in some strik- 
ing instances, how ignorant he was of the situa- 
tion of France. But for the present I will only 
view him in the first nine years of his Adminis- 
tration, and here I am ready to give him the full 
tribute of applause. , 

In November 1783, he came forward to defend 
the King against the efforts of a confederacy ; he 
was successful ; had he failed, the power of the 
Crown would most probably have been placed 
under the control of that confederacy, which was 
denominated the Coalition. An oligarchy would 
have been established ; and of all the forms of 



107 

government, oligarchy is most oppressive to the 
people. Had Mr. Fox's Bill been carried, the 
patronage of India would have been placed in the 
hands of the Coalition : and while they possessed 
that patronage, it would have been very difficult 
for the King to have removed them from the Ad- 
ministration. It would have been difficult to pre- 
vail on men to accept of office, while they knew 
that they were to contend with an opposition pos- 
sessing this patronage. We know from English 
history the dangerous consequences which have 
followed from an irremovable Parliament; perhaps 
equal mischiefs might have followed from an 
irremovable Administration. I give Mr. Pitt 
full credit for his wise and able conduct on this 
occasion. 

In 1785 he brought forward his Irish Proposi- 
tions. They seemed to me to be drawn with too 
much minute detail. I never could form an opi- 
nion as to what the result would have been if they 
had been adopted. At the close of the discus- 
sion, Mr. Pitt allowed such clauses to he intro- 
duced as insured the rejection of his Propositions 
by the Irish Parliament: it was generally believed 
that he adopted this conduct in compliance with 
the apprehensions of great cotton manufacturers in 
Lancashire and Scotland. 

In the following session he established the 
Sinking Fund ; a measure highly beneficial while 
accompanied with the pacific system. About the 
same time be negotiated the commercial treaty 



108 

with France. In reflecting on this treaty, I can 
only regret that it was not negotiated with more 
boldness, and extended to more objects. But 
Mr. Pitt was most probably controlled by the 
fears of commercial men. On the King's illness 
in 1788, I think Mr. Pitt acted judiciously in re- 
sisting the language of Lord Loughborough and 
Mr. Fox. But I cannot say that I saw with plea- 
sure his attempt to limit the powers of royalty 
while exercised by the Prince Regent. The 
King's recovery made this Bill unnecessary ; but 
the opinions then thrown out have, perhaps, been 
subsequently injurious. 

I have thus enumerated the principal acts of Mr. 
Pitt during these nine years, that I might declare 
most explicitly my approbation of his conduct. 
During these nine years, I think Mr. Pitt's Ad- 
ministration, considered together, and as a whole, 
eminently beneficial to this country. It would 
have been fortunate for the glory of Mr. Pitt 
if he had been removed from office at the 
close of the year 1792. It would have been 
equally fortunate for his country ; for during 
the remaining eight years of his Adminis- 
tration, every measure which he brought forward, 
displayed his incapacity as a Statesman. There 
is full proof, that down to the close of the year 
1792, Mr. Pitt had no intention to abandon his 
pacific system. In the summer of 1792, towards 
the close of the session, he said in the House of 
Commons, " England never had a fairer prospect 



109 

of a long continuance of peace than she has at the 
present moment. I think we may confidently 
reckon on peace for ten years." But my opinion 
of his perseverance in the pacific system does not 
rest on his expressions in Parliament. Before the 
close of the session in 1792, the three per cents 
had risen almost to par. Mr. Pitt saw that this 
gave him an opportunity of reducing 32,000,000 
of four per cent, stock to three per cent. He ne- 
gotiated with the holders of the four per cents : 
they demanded a larger bonus than he chose to 
give, and he closed his treaty with them, by say- 
ing, " Then we will put off the reduction of this 
stock to next year." Can any man believe that 
Mr. Pitt would have used this language if he had 
at that time intended to take part in the war ? for 
the war was at that time actually begun by Aus- 
tria, Prussia, and other German Princes. 

In the close of the year 1792, Mr. Burke pre- 
vailed on the great Whig families to declare for 
war with France: it was well known that this de- 
claration would be highly acceptable to the King. 
Perhaps every King in Europe had been alarmed 
by the French Revolution. Most certainly all 
German Princes had felt this alarm in a very high 
degree ; and a jealous apprehension of encroach- 
ment on his power, had always been a marked 
feature in the King's character. The great Whig 
families were received by the King with joy. 
Mr. Burke was rewarded with two pensions, esti- 
mated to be worth 40,000/. ; whether he received 

K 2 



110 

any further gratification from M. de Calonne, I 
cannot say. The language by which Mr. Burke 
prevailed on the great Whig families to declare 
for war was, I apprehend, the following : He 
stated to them, that the French Revolution was 
an insurrection of the many against the few ; of 
the people against the constituted authorities, 
of the commonalty against the nobility : that if 
the principles on which the French Revolution 
was founded were not crushed, they would spread 
through Europe : that if noblesse were not re-es- 
tablished in France, nobility would be abolished 
in England : that every motive of self-preservation 
required them to come forward and exert them- 
selves to stop this revolution : that the sentiment 
of enthusiasm which at that time seemed to actu- 
ate the whole French nation, would probably soon 
subside if restrained within the limits of France ; 
but that, if not restrained, it would spread over 
other nations : that the agitations in France might 
be considered as a hurricane ; that if they could 
oqtlive that hurricane, they would be in a state 
of safetv. 

I believe these arguments were used very open- 
ly by Mr. Burke. I believe there were other ar- 
guments which were used more secretlv to the 
leaders of the Whig party. He reminded these 
Noblemen, that their political importance depend- 
ed on the power which they possessed in nomina- 
ting members of the House of Commons ; that 
this power was by many considered as a usurpa- 
tion : that the attempt of the British House of 



Ill 

Commons to extend the right of taxation over our 
Colonies in America, had led people to examine 
the manner in which members of the House of 
Commons obtained seats in that House : that in 
consequence of this examination, it was found that 
there were many members who possessed their 
seats by the nomination of proprietors and patrons 
of boroughs ; and that it was in consequence of 
this circumstance, and of the facility with which 
a Minister could purchase the support of these 
members from the respective patrons and proprie- 
tors, that the American war had been so obsti- 
nately persevered in, against the interest of the 
country : that this opinion had led to a wish for a 
reform in the House of Commons : that this sen- 
timent had not only prevailed with great numbers 
of the people, but that it had been publickly pro- 
moted and recommended by individuals of the 
first consequence. He desired them to reflect, 
whether, if French principles were allowed to pre- 
vail in England, reform of Parliament must not be 
the necessary consequence ? and whether the ex- 
tinguishment of the power of their party would 
not be the immediate result of such a reform ? 

The leaders of the Whig party were at that 
time the Duke of Portland, Earl Fitzwilliam, and 
Earl Spencer. I believe that the Duke of Port- 
land was tired of having been so long in opposi- 
tion ; and that he was desirous of reaping those 
advantages which he could obtain by promoting 
the King's wishes. I believe that Earl Fitzwil- 
liam and Earl Spencer were wholly free from any 



112 

desire to obtain office or emoluments ; but both of 
them had been educated from early life in that 
leading principle of the Whig party, that they 
were to acquire power by a confederacy of great 
families. I date the origin of that party which is 
now denominated the party of the great Whig 
families, from the fall of Sir Robert Walpole. 
Sir Robert Walpole had governed the country by 
uniting the influence of Government to the Whig 
party. I will not stop to inquire whether Sir 
Robert Walpole was a great minister ; but his 
pacific system was certainly beneficial to England, 
and secured the Brunswick family on the throne. 
On his fall, Sir Robert had dexterously contrived 
to destroy the power of his rival, Mr. Pulteney. 
The Earldom of Bath, conferred on that gentle- 
man, extinguished his importance. The Admi- 
nistration then fell into the hands of men who had 
been the supporters of Sir Robert Walpole. They 
were at first called the Pelham Party. On the 
retirement of the Duke of Newcastle, and the ad- 
vancement of the Marquis of Rockingham to of- 
fice, they were called the Rockingham Party. On 
the death of the Marquis of Rockingham, and the 
Coalition which took place at the end of the year 
1782, they went by the name of the Coalitionists. 
They are now distinguished by the name of the 
Party of the great Whig Families. Their prin- 
ciple was to possess influence by confederacy. 
On the first formation of this party, this principle 
was not openly avowed; but on Mr. Burke's be- 
ing placed in the service of the Marquis of Rock- 



113 

ingham, that gentleman saw the great advantage 
which he should derive to himself from propagat- 
ing that principle of confederacy. The doctrine 
which he inculcated was, that there are certain 
great families whose ancestors placed the Bruns- 
wicks on the throne; that from this circumstance 
the descendants of those families have a right to 
be the Ministers, and to dictate the measures of 
Government. No language could be more ac- 
ceptable to men of high rank, large fortunes, and 
moderate talents. I do not use this expression, 
moderate talents, from any sentiment of disres- 
pect ; but the education of men of high rank and 
great wealth necessarily occasions them to stand 
in need of the assistance of those whose inferior 
rank and moderate fortunes have subjected them 
to a different education. Mr. Burke felt the in- 
fluence which this language gave him over the 
Rockingham party; but his influence over that 
party was not so transcendant while the Marquis 
of Rockingham lived, as it was after his death. 
The Marquis of Rockingham numbered among 
his friends Sir George Savile and the Duke of 
Richmond; these two gentlemen checked in a 
considerable degree the assuming authority of 
Mr. Burke : perhaps there might be others who 
concurred with them. Most certainly Mr. Burke 
had not the influence over the Marquis of Rock- 
ingham which he afterwards possessed over the 
Duke of Portland. 

Let me pause to consider for a moment whe- 



114 

iher the arguments thus used by Mr. Burke to the 
great Whig families were such as they ought to 
have attended to. The circumstance which had 
most contributed to the French Revolution was 
the distinction between Noblesse and Bourgeoisie. 
Thirty thousand noble families were supposed to 
comprehend one hundred and fifty thousand indi- 
viduals; the^e claimed exemption from the most 
burthensome taxes, and exclusive advancement 
in the army, in the navy, in the church, and in the 
parliaments. Could a commonalty, now become 
opulent and intelligent, submit to this humiliating 
distinction? I appeal to every man who has dis- 
passionately examined the French Revolution, 
whether this odious distinction of Noblesse and 
Bourgeoisie must not be set down as the first and 
principal cause of that great event? In England 
no such distinction exists; our hereditary Nobles 
are few, not exceeding in number two hundred 
and fifty: they possess no exemption from the 
payment of any tax ; nor are they entitled to ex- 
clusive advancement in the army, the navy, the 
church, or the law : their children are of the order 
of the commonalty. In truth, British peers are 
magistrates, hereditary legislators, hereditary 
judges, and hereditary advisers of the Crown: 
they have as little resemblance to French No- 
blesse as they have to the order of Mandarins in 
China. 

Unfortunately the leaders of the great families 
could not be brought to see the fallacy of Mr. 



115 

Burke's argument; they were misled by the simi- 
litude of names ; and they declared themselves ad- 
vocates for embarking the country in war. Mr. 
Pitt acceded to the proposal : he was ignorant not 
only of the causes of the French Revolution, but 
of the strength of France: he was so little ac- 
quainted with the resources of that country, and 
with the energies of which she was capable when 
her whole force was put in motion, that he had 
persuaded himself that France could not carry on 
the war for six months: he held this language to 
M. Bigot de St. Croix, who had been Minister 
for Foreign Affairs in France, on the lOth of Au- 
gust 1792. M. de St. Croix had emigrated to 
England between the 10th of August and the end 
of that year. When the resolution to declare war 
against France was about to be taken, Mr. Pitt 
discoursed on the subject with this gentleman: 
he pointed out to M. de St. Croix, that it would 
be impossible for France to continue the war for 
more than six months, as she had no finances. 
M. de St. Croix replied to him, 4< Sir, if you 
knew the resources of France as well as I know 
them, you would know that she is capable of car- 
rying on war for a great length of time." When 
Mr. Pitt pressed him on the circumstance of her 
finances, M. de St. Croix answered, " Sir, France 
is more powerful because she has not what you 
call finances; those who are in possession of the 
government wil) put all property in requisition." 
I had the account of this conversation from M. 



116 

de St. Croix himself; and he added, that from 
that hour Mr. Pitt's door was always shut against 
him. Mr. Pitt expressed the same sentiments 
to another political friend of mine, and I have 
no doubt that he used this language to many 
others. But the matter does not rest on private 
conversation. Mr. Pitt employed Sir Francis 
D'Yvernois to publish a pamphlet, showing, that 
the state of the French finances would disable 
France from going on with the war for six months; 
and so infatuated was Mr. Pitt with this opinion, 
that he suffered Sir Francis D'Yvernois annually 
to repeat the same opinion for several years. 

There is another circumstance, which so strong- 
ly marks Mr. Pitt's want of sagacity as a States- 
man, that I cannot help taking notice of it. In- 
fluenced by the opinion of Mr. Burke, the great 
Whig families had declared for war; but the opi- 
nion of Mr. Burke was clear and explicit : it was, 
that war should be undertaken for the purpose of 
re-establishing the ancien regime in France. I 
use this expression, ancien regime, because it was 
employed by the French royalists as a term of art, 
viz. that every thing should be replaced exactly 
as it had existed before the assembly of the Etats 
Generaux: to undertake a war for this object 
might be injudicious ; but the proposal was intel- 
ligible and definite: Mr. Pitt acceded to it; but 
engrafted his own plan on Mr. Burke's, viz. " In- 
demnity for the past, and security for the future." 
This language could not be misunderstood; every 



117 

one saw that the meaning of it was, that France 
should be dismembered ; that she should be de- 
prived of certain provinces, and by that means be 
rendered less formidable to the rest of Europe. 
Mr. Pitt did not perceive that Mr. Burke's plan 
and his own could not both be effected by the 
same measures. Mr. Burke wished to re-esta- 
blish France in all her former strength ; and Mr. 
Pitt wished to re-establish the Bourbons in France, 
mutilated and dismembered. The verv first 
event of the war showed the two plans to be irre- 
concileable. 

In 1793, Valenciennes was taken. The arms 
of France were removed, and the Austrian eagle 
erected in their stead. Within forty- eight hours 
there was written under this eagle, IC Ton aigle 
sera an dindon" A friend of mine remonstrated 
with the late Duke of Brunswick, that he tftight, 
that same campaign, have taken Landau; his an- 
swer was, " Ought I, as the King of Prussia's 
general, to have employed his army to take Lan- 
dau for Austria?" In the close of the same year 
we took possession of Toulon and the French 
fleet : we received this possession by a treaty, in 
which it was stipulated, that every thing should 
be preserved for the use of the French King. 
Mr. Burke's plan required that this treaty should 
have been faithfully observed; but Mr. Pitt's 
wish, that the power of France should be weak- 
ened, prevailed, and the terms of the treaty were 
. violated. 



118 

After these events, the designs of Mr. Pitt were 
manifest to every one ; and all who wished that 
France might remain entire withdrew their assis- 
tance. The King of Prussia would naturally say, 
** It is with difficulty that I support myself at pre- 
sent against Austria ; what must become of me 
if the Austrian power is augmented V } He con- 
tinued to receive subsidies from England ; but he 
never after gave any assistance in carrying on the 
war. The King of Spain, as a Bourbon, had no 
wish to see France dismembered. The French 
royalists could never wish to see Mr. Pitt's de- 
signs attended withlsuccess. In a word, the views 
with which he carried on the war reduced Eng- 
land to one single ally, viz. Austria ; and, to en- 
able that power to carry on her military opera- 
tions. England supplied subsidies to an amount 
never before recorded in history. The plans of 
Mr. Burke and Mr. Pitt were avowedly so differ- 
ent, that the military operations were carried on 
by distinct Ministers. The expedition to the 
coast of France, in 1795, with a view to give as- 
sistance to the insurgents in La Vendee, was un- 
der the direction of Mr. Windham, the Minister 
of Mr. Burke's friends. It was as badly planned 
and as badly executed as any expedition ever un- 
dertaken by a War Minister. 

Let any man dispassionately review Mr. Pitt's 
conduct on these points, viz. his want of knowledge 
of the causes of the French Revolution; his igno- 
rance of the resources of France ; and his en- 



119 

gaging in a war tor two objects inconsistent with 
each other; and let him then say, w 7 hether he 
thinks Mr. Pitt was a great Statesman. I ought 
to mention that Mr. Fox refused to concur in 
opinion with Mr. Burke on this subject : his good 
sense led him to see the folly of engaging in a 
war for the purpose of compelling the French na- 
tion to submit to a form of government which they 
abhorred ; and he had the integrity to resist every 
allurement, both of emolument and power. He 
remained the decided opponent of the measures 
which were then adopted. I believe that Mr. 
Pitt soon regretted his having engaged in the un- 
dertaking ; but he was committed, he could not 
go back. I think his friends must acknowledge 
that he showed no great talents as a War Minis- 
ter. Prussia and Spain soon abandoned him« 
He relied on the armies of Austria ; and to give 
give activity to those armies, he supplied Austria 
with British money, with a boundless profusion. 
I can discover no superior wisdom in the manner 
in which he raised this money. The sale of the 
land-tax, the income-tax, and that most calami- 
^kous measure the stoppage of the Bank, were ra- 
ther the measures of a daring projector than of a 
prudent financier. The. sale of the land-tax was 
a plan adopted in imitation of the French govern- 
ment ; for it was the putting property in requisi- 
tion. The income-tax was a violation of faith ; 
for those who had redeemed their land-tax had a 
right to presume that a similar tax, under another 
name, was not to be immediately laid on their 



120 

land : it was also a violation of the faith pledged 
to the public creditors. The paper- money, con- 
sequent on the stoppage of the Bank, has produ- 
ced calamities of which we do not yet see the 
end. Mr. Pitt floundered on, adopting various 
but unsuccessful projects, until the commence- 
ment of the year 1801. He then resigned. Va- 
rious reasons were mentioned for this resigna- 
tion : the friends of Mr. Pitt gave out, that he had 
resigned because the King would not consent to 
that emancipation of the Catholics, which he had 
recommended ; but I do not believe that this was 
the real cause of the quarrel between the King 
and Mr. Pitt : the same cause was assigned when 
the King dismissed the Ministers distinguished 
by the name of the Talents, in 1807 ; and it is 
now well known that the emancipation of the 
Catholics was not at that time the real ground for 
their dismission. I have reason to believe, that 
the displeasure which the King, in 1801, had con- 
ceived against Mr. Pitt, arose from other causes. 
The Austrian armies had been so repeatedly de- 
feated by the French, that they were completely 
disheartened ; their discouragement was so great, 
that they could no longer be brought to face 
French soldiers in the field. Mr. Pitt probably 
stated this circumstance to the King, and point- 
ed out to him, that if the war against France was 
to be carried on by continental armies, the King 
of Prussia was the only sovereign who could sup- 
ply the means ; and he proposed to the King, that, 



121 

to induce the King of Prussia to afford this assis- 
tance, His Majesty should cede to him some part 
of his German dominions. The King was indig- 
nont at the proposal ; it not only induced him to 
dismiss Mr. Pitt, but it occasioned a return of 
that unfortunate malady with which His Majesty 
had been visited in 1788. 

I do not pretend to say that I have any certain 
knowledge of the facts above stated ; but I have 
some reason to believe, that the quarrel between 
the King and Mr. Pitt had a reference to the 
King's German dominions. There is one circum- 
stance which tends to confirm the above suspicion, 
and which is known to the whole world. About 
the time that this quarrel broke out between the 
King and Mr. Pitt, a body of Prussian troops en- 
tered the Duchy of Lunenburgh. They were not 
in such a number as to give reason to believe 
that they came there to conquer ; the inference 
therefore is, that they came there to take posses- 
sion under a treaty. On the dismission of Mr. 
Pitt, these Prussian troops were removed. 

During the eight years that the war had been 
thus carried on under the auspices of Mr. Pitt, it 
seemed as if the instigators of the war had con- 
sidered that royalty and nobility would be extin- 
guished if the ancient Government of France were 
not re-established. They carried on the war with 
a violence bordering on despair. Every princi- 
ple of the law of nations was disregarded : every 
prudential consideration was thought of little im- 

l 2 



122 

portance. In Lord Grenville's celebrated letter 
to the British Minister at Genoa he used this ex- 
pression : " In a war like this no nation is to re- 
main neutral." There were two violations of the 
law of nations productive of so much mischief to 
the interests of Great Britain, that I cannot refrain 
from examining them more fully. The first was 
the claim that British ships of war might stop neu- 
tral ships on the high seas, and take out and im- 
press for the King's service any British sailors 
whom they found on board. As the Americans 
were at that time the only neutrals who could be 
said to carry on trade, the question peculiarly af- 
fected them. I will not discuss at large the 
great principle of mare liberum et mare clausum ; 
but I take it, that by the general principles of the 
law of nations every sea is mare liberum^ and to 
be considered as inter communia. Every nation 
has a right to send its ships on this open sea. 
The ship is to be considered as part of that coun- 
try to which it belongs ; and when it hoists its co- 
lours, it shows by what nation it is protected. 
This is the common law of nations ; and as there 
is no general assembly of civilized States capable 
of making statutes to bind the whole, there can 
be no change in this common law, except by 
treaties between certain particular nations, which 
may afterwards have been adopted by other na- 
tions. 

I shall take no notice of any treaties which may 
heretofore have been made between the maritime 



123 

states of Italy or the Hans towns. The first treaty 
of which I shall take notice is a treaty made be- 
tween Sweden and England in 1654. Sweden 
was at that time the sole manufacturer of arms in 
Europe. Oliver Cromwell, who then governed 
England, would not permit the Swedes to supply 
his enemies, the Dutch, with military stores ; and 
he had sufficient influence with the Swedish go- 
vernnment to prevail on them to stipulate that 
neutral ships should not carry military stores to 
any nation with which he was at war. I will not 
enter into the various regulations introduced into 
that treaty, to protect the owner of a ship so visi- 
ted from injury or insult ; but this treaty gave 
birth to what was called contrebande de guerre. 
It was afterwards adopted in a treaty concluded 
between England and Holland in 1668, and was, 
I believe, subsequently acceded to by all the ci- 
vilized nations of Europe. The English Minis- 
ters set up the following claim : they said, We 
have a right to stop and enter a neutral ship to 
search for contrebande de guerre ; when we are on 
board that ship, if we find British sailors, we have 
a right to impress them. If we may reason on the 
Jaw of nations according to the maxims of the 
common law of England, this claim was ill-found- 
ed. By the law of England, a landlord may en- 
ter on the premises leased to his tenant to distrain 
for rent ; but the law says, that this right of entry 
is a qualified power, granted for one single pur- 
pose ; and if the landlord who distrains avails him- 
self of his entry for any other purpose, he is con- 



124 

sidered as having used this power of entering to 
distrain solely as a pretence for entering to enable 
him to commit another act : he is therefore consi- 
dered as a wrong doer, or, according to the lan- 
guage of the common law of England, as a tres- 
passer ab initio. If I may be allowed to apply this 
principle of the law of England to the claim of 
the British Government to impress British sailors 
found on board a neutral ship, I cannot hesitate 
to say that the claim was ill-founded. Let me 
examine it in another point of view. The com- 
mander of the English ship of war who stopped 
the American ship, and took out sailors, saying, 
that they were British subjects, and as such he 
had a right to impress them, was both the claim- 
ant and the judge. From similarity of language 
and appearance, he would of necessity be frequent- 
ly mistaken; but the sailors would be carried 
away, and relief most commonly precluded. 
Would Englishmen ever have submitted to the 
claim of such a right against themselves? And 
if Englishmen would not themselves have sub- 
mitted to the exercise of such a right, ought they 
to have claimed it against others? 

There was another measure of Mr. Pitt's re- 
pugnant to the law of nations, and, in the opinion 
of many very intelligent men, productive of great 
injury to this country. At the commencement 
of the French war in 1793, France was much 
distressed for food, both at home and in her co- 
lonies. The English Government thought it ad- 



125 

visable to endeavour to increase this distress, and 
with this view they stopped all neutral ships car- 
rying provisions to France or to her West India 
colonies. This measure was certainly a violation 
of the law of nations ; for a neutral has a general 
right of trade with either of two belligerents. To 
prevent the complaints of the neutral, the British 
Government paid the invoice price of the goods 
with an increase of ten per cent. But they were 
soon obliged to relinquish this measure of seizing 
these provision ships; for the foreign merchant 
adopted the practice of charging in the invoice so 
high a price for his goods, that, with the addition 
often per cent, allowed him for his supposed pro- 
fits, he found the seizure by the British Govern- 
ment the best market at which his Q^oods could be 
disposed of. The provisions thus detained and 
paid for by our Government, were, through the 
negligence of persons employed to sell, sometimes 
not disposed of until they were much diminished 
in value. At the time that this measure was first 
adopted by the British Government, I recollect 
that a mercantile friend of mine, eminently intel- 
ligent, remarked to me, that Mr. Pitt would be 
fortunate if this disturbance of the provision trade 
of Europe and the West Indies did not ultimately 
prove injurious to ourselves. I will not pretend 
to say how far the measure contributed to that fa- 
mine with which we were a short time after af- 
flicted. 

I will take notice only of one great measure 



126 

more of Mr. Pitt's administration; I mean the 
stoppage of the Bank, and the consequent esta- 
blishment of paper money, in February 1797. 
The adoption of this measure afforded relief from 
that embarrassment which the indiscretion of go- 
vernment had occasioned. By multiplying the 
circulating medium, he raised the price of every 
thing. Every man felt the prosperity of a rising 
market. Taxes could be increased without being 
burdensome; for, when the circulating medium 
was doubled, though the sum demanded by the 
tax-gatherer remained nominally the same, yet 
the pressure was to the extent only of one half. 
All felt prosperity except those who lived on such 
fixed incomes as could not be increased. But 
every man of reflection foresaw the difficulty there 
would be to get rid of this paper money; that, 
while persevered in, the measure of the value of 
all property would be unsettled; and that this 
must in the end produce general confusion. Our 
ministers are now endeavouring to free us from 
paper money; in so doing they act wisely and ho- 
nestly, but great immediate distress is the conse- 
quence of the measure which they are compelled 
to adopt; and, even if they should succeed in re- 
turning to a metallic circulation, they will leave 
the nation oppressed by that unnatural taxation 
which was the progeny of a fictitious paper mo- 
ney. 

Mr. Pitt returned to office in 1804. He inju- 
diciously prevailed on the Austrian Government 



127 

to renew the war, for their troops were too much 
dispirited by repeated defeats to be fit immediate- 
ly to meet the victorious armies of France. This 
was in vain urged to the British Minister; he per- 
sisted; the Austrians failed in their efforts; and 
Mr. Pitt died, most probably the victim of afflic- 
tion. 

I decline saying any thing further of his admi- 
nistration. As I frequently expressed my disap- 
probation of his measures while I was in Parlia- 
ment, I may perhaps be supposed to think of him 
with ill-will; but I am not conscious that such an 
opinion would be well founded. Except on two 
occasions I never had any private intercourse with 
Mr. Pitt. On both these occasions his offers 
were expressive of kindness ; and in the House of 
Commons he more than once protected me when 
others wished to injure me. I believe he began 
his political career with sentiments of strict inte- 
grity; but, as he himself once said, H Constituted 
as the House of Commons then was, no Minister 
could act honestly ;" and the personal character 
of his Master increased the difficulty. I have al- 
ready expressed my opinion of his conduct in 
1784, when he protected the King and the people 
from the meditated designs of oligarchy ; and al- 
though the nation suffered in some instances from 
his being unacquainted with the state of other 
countries, yet that his administration, from De- 
cember 1783, when he accepted office, to the 
close of the year 1792, when he consented to 



1^8 

begin a war with France, was on the whole be- 
neficial. 

A question is often asked, which was the abler 
speaker in the House of Commons, Mr. Pitt or 
Mr. Fox. Their situations were so different, that 
it is very difficult to answer this question. Mr. 
Pitt was supported by a well-disciplined majority, 
and his eloquence was calculated to make his 
measures plausible. He was a very correct gram- 
marian ; but there was one talent in which he sur- 
passed every speaker I ever heard. I mean the 
talent of building a speech, and of introducing the 
arguments of his adversaries exactly in that place 
in which it best suited him to answer them. Mr. 
Fox never built a speech ; he relied on his ability 
to seize weak parts of his adversary's argument, 
and beat them to pieces. He did this with ex- 
traordinary skill and success. 

The style of a public speaker must necessarily 
depend on the audience which he addresses, on 
the ends which he wishes to obtain ; perhaps, in 
some degree, on his own personal situation. Con- 
sidered in this point of view, Lord North was 
certainly a very good speaker. His pleasantry 
and good temper were well suited to turn aside 
the impetuous attacks of his adversaries. To form 
a true opinion of Mr. Burke's merit as a speaker, 
he also must be viewed in the same manner. His 
importance depended on his standing high in the 
opinion of that party which had placed him in the 
House : for this reason, he always introduced such 



129 

passages as captivated admiration ; and though 
his speeches were often injudicious, and rarely 
had the effect of bringing others to think and to 
act with him, except they were previously so dis- 
posed by being of the same party, yet he never 
made a speech in which there were not those bril- 
liant passages which the Roman authors call 
Purpurei Panni. When he brought forward the 
Impeachment against Mr. Hastings, he laid on the 
table of the House of Commons twenty-two 
Charges. I was under the necessity of examin- 
ing those Charges with attention. I think they 
were a master-piece in that style of composition 
which Mr. Burke thought himself authorised to 
use. They were a happy mixture of assertion, of 
evidence, of inference, and of invective, so dexter- 
ously blended, that it was extremely difficult to 
unravel them ; but admirably suited to influence 
the opinions of those who read negligently. 

Demosthenes is considered as the ablest speak- 
er of antiquity. He addressed his speeches to an 
audience highly intelligent, and actuated by an 
opinion that the people of Athens were entitled to 
hold the first place among the Greek Republics. 
The same arguments, addressed to a British 
House of Commons, would have appeared ridi- 
culous and contemptible. 

Mr. Pitt died early in the year 1806. An Ad- 
ministration was immediately formed, composed 
of the three parties ; the Grenvilles, the great 
Whig families, Lord Sidmouth and his friends ; 

M 



130 

Mr. Fox was Secretary of State for Foreign Af- 
fairs. The immediate friends of Mr. Pitt, viz. 
Mr. Percival, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Canning, 
Lord Eldon, and others, took their stations in 
Opposition. An indiscreet friend of the new Ad- 
ministration incautiously said, that they compri- 
sed all the talents of the country. From this 
accident, they got the nick-name of " the Ta- 
lents." I decline to review the measures of this 
Administration ; for I cannot say that I see many 
to be applauded, and I see several which I must 
condemn. There is, however, one measure which 
I must take notice of, because it has already pro- 
duced much injury to my country. Its injurious 
consequences are still existing, and perhaps may 
never be removed. The measure I allude to, was 
the declaration of War against the King of Prus- 
sia. This Monarch had taken possession of Han- 
over. His Majesty, King George III. felt the 
strongest indignation at this circumstance ; and 
to gratify his Majesty's resentment, Mr. Fox con- 
sented to declare War against the King of Prus- 
sia. In adopting this conduct, Mr. Fox forgot 
his duties as Minister of the King of Great Bri- 
tain ; for it was not for the interest of Great Bri- 
tain, to weaken the force of Prussia, nor had she 
any just ground for War against that Monarch. 
Buonaparte had destroyed the power of Austria, 
and compelled Russia to retire from the contest. 
Having subdued Austria, and the Southern part 
of Germany, it was not probable that he would 



131 

leave Prussia Sovereign of the Northern part; and 
the King of Prussia had given Buonaparte ample 
grounds for complaint. It was not only visible 
that it was the interest of Buonaparte to attack 
Prussia, but his intentions to do it could scarcely 
be said to be concealed ; for the report of such 
intention was prevalent through every part of 
France. While the Continent was in this situa- 
tion, could it be for the interest of Great Britain 
to diminish the strength of Prussia ? 

But after the War against Prussia had been 
declared, Mr. Fox adopted another measure 
which has produced most iujurous consequences 
to Great Britain. I allude to his putting the four 
great rivers of the King of Prussia's dominions, 
the Trave, the Elbe, the Weser, and the Ems, 
in a state of blockade. Mr. Fox announced this 
blockade in a letter to Mr. Monroe, the American 
Minister in London, in April 1806. In this let- 
ter Mr. Fox signified to the American Minister, 
that his Majesty having thought proper to put the 
four above mentioned rivers in a state of block- 
ade, American ships would not be allowed to en- 
ter them. In the course of the ensuing summer, 
Lord Howick, now Earl Grey, who had succeeded 
Mr. Fox in the management of foreign affairs, ex- 
tended the blockade along the Northern Coast of 
France ; and subsequently it was extended along 
the Western Coast, and the Mediterranean. I 
shall consider this measure in three points of 
view : First, how far it was consistent with the 



132 

law of nations ; Secondly, how far it was consis- 
tent with our immediate interests ; Thirdly, I shall 
take notice of the injurious consequences which 
have since followed from it. As to the first point, 
it appears to me to have been a direct violation 
of the law of nations. That law allows to every 
Neutral the right of trading with either of two 
Belligerents. This right may be restrained by 
treaty. The first Treaty that seems to have re- 
strained this right, is the Treaty of Commerce be- 
tween England and Holland in 1668 ; which 
Treaty was subsequently adopted by France and 
the other principal European nations, in the Trea- 
ties of Nimeguen, Ryswich, and Utrecht. All 
Treaties are negotiated in French. The expres- 
sion in this Treaty is, that the Neutral shall not 
trade avec une place assiegee, bloquee ou investie. 
I believe the w T ord place is never used in the 
French language to signify a country. It is gene- 
rally employed to denote town or fortress. But 
if I am mistaken in this opinion, I think I cannot 
be mistaken in my next observation, viz. that as- 
siege e and investie, the first and third of the par- 
ticiples applied to the substantive place, are only 
applicable to a town or fortress ; and the interme- 
diate participle bloquee, must be considered as an- 
alogous to the other two. I apprehend that the 
meaning of the Article thus introduced into the 
Treaty of 1668, was this : viz. That the Neutral 
should abstain from trading with a town, which 
either of two Belligerents was endeavouring to 



133 

capture : — and it was reasonable that the Neutral 
should be thus restrained ; for, by continuing to 
trade with such a town, he might prolong the Siege. 
I know it may be said, that by this construction, 
there can be no blockade of a Sea-port, except it 
is blockaded by land as well as by sea. My an- 
swer is, that if blockade by land, as well as by 
sea, is necesary to the Capture, the town which is 
not blockaded by land, as well as by sea, is not a 
town within the Article of the Treaty of 1668. 

Buonaparte followed the example which we had 
set him. By his Berlin Decree, he put restraints 
on the Commerce of one Nation with another. 
This produced new restraints from the British 
Government. These were followed by Buona 
parte's Decrees from Milan : and thus both Na- 
tions concurred in restraining Commercial inter- 
course. Was this for the interest of Great Bri- 
tain ? This was the second point which I wish- 
ed to consider. 

I can easily perceive that this restriction of the 
Commerce of the world, assisted the views of 
Buonaparte. His strength did not arise from 
Commerce, but from the Armies which he could 
maintain ; and he maintained those Armies by the 
pillage of the Continent. By cramping Com 
merce, he diminished the resources of Great Bri- 
tain. But what interest could Great Britain have, 
in thus restraining Commerce ? She deprived 
herself of the immediate advantage of sending out 
her manufactures by Neutral ships. The preju- 

m 2 



134 

dice she subsequently suffered by this measure, 
was still greater ; for it produced a War with the 
United States of America, The Americans said, 
" France and England concur in acts of injustice 
against us : we cannot make war with both : 
whichever of the two Nations first relinquishes its 
acts of injustice, we will make War upon the 
other, if it does not adopt a similar conduct with- 
in four months." Buonaparte immediately re- 
voked his Decrees, as far as they regarded the 
Americans. We refused to revoke our Orders 
of Council ; and War was the consequence. The 
Earl of Liverpool had the good sense to terminate 
this war. 

But mark the consequences which have fol- 
lowed from this unfortunate restraint on the Com- 
merce of Nations. Germany, accustomed to be 
supplied with our manufactures, was obliged to 
set up manufactures within itself ; and on the re- 
turn of Peace, has been obliged, in a great de* 
gree, to reject the use of our manufactures, be- 
cause the sale of them interfered with the prospe- 
rity of her own. 

Mr. Canning and Lord Castlereagh, who suc- 
ceeded Earl Grey in the Foreign Office, both ap- 
proved and persevered in this doctrine of block- 
ade ; and it has been contended that Buonaparte 
first began the restrictions ; but this has been de- 
nied by the Dutch Commissioners. Mr. Fox's 
letter was in April, 1806. Can any instrument of 
an earlier date be produced, issued by Buona- 



135 

parte ? Before the commencement of these re- 
strictions, Great Britain possessed, almost exclu- 
sively, the manufacture of cotton. The distress 
in Lancashire and Glasgow, too evidently shows 
how much we have suffered by the establish- 
ment of the Cotton Manufacture in other parts of 
Europe. 

I am aware how much I shall offend the friends 
of Mr. Fox by making these remarks on this mea- 
sure of blockade ; but truth requires it. I cannot 
censure his conduct without feeling regret ; for 
he had qualities which conciliated both affection 
and esteem. Perhaps few men have ever owed 
more to nature, and less to education ; for from 
early life, he had never been accustomed to ha- 
bits of restraint. He owed to nature great parts, 
and an affectionate heart. Alixs se dedere eorum 
obsequi studiis, was prevalent with him, even to a 
weakness ; but having never accustomed himself 
to habits of restraint, he loved the deep stake, 
and the rash game. This ruined his fortune in 
private life, and was equally injurious to him in 
his political career. He was three times the effi- 
cient Minister of this country. During the first 
period that he was in this situation, viz. in 1782, 
he brought forward no great public measure ; al- 
though, as the House of Commons had declared 
its wish to put an end to the American War, a 
termination of that Contest was the measure which 
he obviously ought to have brought forward, yet 
he does not appear to have taken any step with 



136 

that view. He was probably rendered inactive 
by the dissensions in the Cabinet, by the conten- 
tions between the political parties, and the dis- 
union among his own friends. In this year, he re- 
mained Minister only three months. 

After the death of Lord Rockingham, he came 
to an open breach with the Earl of Shelburne and 
the Duke of Richmond ; and resigned his situa- 
tion in the Cabinet, in compliance with the wishes 
of Mr. Burke. 

His coalition with Lord North, at the end of 
the year 1782, was a rash and ill-advised mea- 
sure: I have heard Mr. Fox use this argument 
in his justification : — " Our Party is formed on 
the principle of Confederacy ; ought we not, then 
to confederate with him who can give us the 
greatest strength ? And who can give us greater 
strength than Lord North ?" But Mr. Fox did 
not take into his calculation the importance of 
character. The Nation could not bear an alliance 
between the Minister who had so injuriously car- 
ried on the War, and the man by whose exertions 
that Minister had been compelled to relinquish 
the Contest. 

In 1783, he was Minister for nine months ; du- 
ring which time, he was wholly under the gui- 
dance of Mr. Burke. The India Bill was the 
great measure of his administration during this 
period. In 1786, he yielded to the wishes of 
Mr. Burke, and prevailed on the Opposition to 
support that gentleman in the Impeachment of 



137 

Mr. Hastings. His acquiescence in the wishes 
of Mr. Burke on this occasion, can be attributed 
only to the influence which Mr. Burke had over 
him, and to his indulgence to those with whom he 
acted : for he must have had the good sense to 
have seen the advantage which this measure gave 
to his rival Mr. Pitt. Mr. Burke's importance 
depended on his not being disgraced by this Im- 
peachment : Mr. Pitt could at any time inflict that 
disgrace on him ; and as Mr. Burke's influence 
over Mr. Fox guided the Opposition, that Party 
was, from the moment that Mr. Pitt acquiesced 
m the Impeachment, under the controul of Mr. 
Pitt. 

This Impeachment necessarily led to connexion 
between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Burke ; and as the 
good sense and upright heart of Mr. Fox could 
not be prevailed on to approve of a War with 
France, Mr. Burke openly separated himself from 
him. 

He died in September, 1806. He had re- 
ceived from Nature great parts. He had not ac- 
quired much political knowledge. By patient 
reading and reflection, that political knowledge 
which he possessed, was principally derived from 
the business of the House of Commons. Perhaps 
it may be said of him, as of his progenitor, Charles 
the Second, " that Indolence was his Sultana- 
Queen." — In contemplating his character, we can 
scarcely avoid recollecting that expression which 
the Roman historian applies to the Emperor Gal- 
ba : — " Capax imperii nisi imperassetP 



138 



CHAPTER VI. 

On the Causes which contributed to the Extm- 
guishment of Feudal Burthens in England. 

I have stated Feudal Burthens, or as they are 
called by the French, Les Droits Seigncureaux, 
as one of the principal causes which led the peo- 
ple of France to wish for a Revolution. A ques- 
tion will naturally occur, how happens it that no 
such aversion has existed in England? The an- 
swer is obvious. Because no oppressive Feudal 
Burthens exist in England. The payments by 
copy-holders on alienation, or descent, are perhaps 
politically inconvenient, because they may prevent 
the improvement of land ; but this tenure affects 
at present so very small a part of our land, that in 
some places it is scarcely known, while the Feu- 
dal payments in France were spread through the 
whole country. 

As France and England were both originally 
Feudal Governments, how has it happened, that 
these Feudal payments have remained so univer- 
sally in France, while they have been nearly abo- 
lished in England? It is difficult to answer this 
question : but I will mention two circumstances 
which seem to me to have contributed to their 
abolition in England. The first was the statute 
^)f Quia Emptores, the 18th of Edward I. This 



139 

statute prevented sub-infeudation. Before this 
statute, a tenant by knightVservice could alien his 
land, to be held of himself by knight's-service. 
But after this statute, the alienee was to hold of 
that lord of whom the alienor had held. 

The other circumstance was the usage which 
gradually prevailed in England of feoffment to 
uses. 

Fraud, fear, and convenience, the great springs 
of human action, introduced this practice. 

The man who was conscious that he held his 
land by a bad title, enfeoffed a friend of his land 
to the use of himself, that when the rightful own- 
er of the land brought an action against him, he 
might plead non tenet, that he was not the owner 
of the land; and by this plea defeat the demandant's 
action. 

But fear was a more universal motive, This 
conveyance to a friend to protect lands from for- 
feiture for Treason, must have operated far more 
frequently ; perhaps the practice became almost 
universal during the long period of dispute be- 
tween the two Houses of York and Lancaster. 
No man could be certain of the success of that 
party which he joined. He therefore enfeoffed a 
friend to uses, that in case of his being unfortu- 
nate, his family might be protected from forfeiture. 
There was a third motive to induce men to 
adopt this practice of feoffment io uses. By the 
common law, a freehold interest in land could 
not be devised by will ; but if a man had, in his 



140 

life- time, limited his land to uses, this use could 
be devised by his will. 

From these motives, almost all the lands in 
England had become vested in Feoffees to Uses; 
and as by this practice, the Lords had lost the 
Feudal profits they were entitled to from their 
lands, either those Feudal payments were forgot- 
ten, or were released, or fell into disuse. 

Henry VIII. by the statute which he procured 
to be passed toward the close of his reign, pre- 
served these Feudal payments to the Crown, by 
re-uniting the seisin, or legal estate, to the use. 
On the restoration of Charles II. the King con- 
sented to abolish Feudal services, and to receive 
a compensation in lieu of them. But in the sta- 
tute, which provides this compensation to the 
Crown, no compensation is provided for any sub- 
ject of whom lands were held by knight's-service. 
The inference is, that at the Restoration, there 
were no lands in England held by knight's-service 
of a subject. Yet most certainly, in all Feudal 
Governments, tenure of the alienor, and attendant 
services, were consequent on every alienation, 
except there was either an express or implied pro- 
vision to the contrary. This rule was so fully es- 
tablished by the common law of England, that 
before the statute of Quia Emptores y if B. had 
held lands of A. by knightVservice, and had 
aliened those lands to C. and his heirs, without 
expressing the services by which C. should hold, 
the law said that C. should hold the lands of B. 



Hi 

by knight's service, and the same payments as B. 
paid to A. 

Perhaps the great proportion of the lands in 
England, which had been conveyed in mortmain, 
contributed to the abolition of Feudal services ; 
for when land was conveyed in mortmain, the 
Feudal services were suspended ; or, to speak 
more accurately, no Feudal services were receiv- 
able. And when that land, by confiscation of 
Convent property, in the time of Henry VIII. had 
passed into the hands of a layman, from whom 
the Feudal service might have been demanded, 
either the Feudal services were forgotten, or the 
demand neglected to be made. But from what- 
ever circumstance it happened, I believe, that at 
the restoration of Charles II. there were no lands 
in England held of a subject by knights-service. 
In France, down to the time of the Revolution, 
Feudal services of different natures, and to diffe- 
rent extents, seem to have prevailed through 
the whole country. 



N 



U2 



CHAPTER VII. 

Reform of Parliament. 

I will now consider that most important ques- 
tion, the Reform of Parliament. A decision on 
this question must, ere long, take place. The 
general attention of the nation has been called to 
it. The people must be subdued, or the subject 
must be fully examined, and some Reform con- 
sented to. Let me first state the sense in which 
I use the words Reform and Revolution. 

I consider Reform to be a correction of abuses 
without destroying the existing Constitution. I 
consider Revolution to be a correction of abuses, 
accompanied with the destruction of 4 the existing 
Constitution. 

In England, in 1688, the nation removed the 
existing dynasty, and established a new one. As 
the dynasty is considered as the most prominent 
part of the Constitution, this change has been de- 
nominated a Revolution. Perhaps, according to 
my definition, it might more properly have been 
called a Reform ; for the two other existing parts 
of the Constitution, viz. the House of Lords and 
the House of Commons, were left unaltered. 

In 1789, that Government which had existed 
in France during the reigns of Louis XIV. and 



143 

Louis XV. was swept away. A new Constitu- 
tion was established, and when Louis XVI. ac- 
cepted Royalty under this new Constitution, the 
same dynasty, but under a new title, was placed 
on the throne. I consider this proceeding in 
1789, to have been, in the fullest sense of the 
word, a Revolution. 

In 1800, the Irish Government was abolished, 
and the inhabitants of Ireland subjected to a new 
Constitution. This measure also I consider as a 
Revolution. 

I have always dreaded Revolution. The crisis 
consequent on it, is sometimes beneficial ; I be- 
lieve it will ultimately be found to be so in 
France ; but the paroxysms which precede the 
crisis, are terrifying. As an Englishman, I have 
always wished for Reform ; because I have al- 
ways been of opinion, that if Reform did not take 
place, Revolution would be a necessary conse- 
quence of the existing abuses. 

I will state what I consider as the abuse which 
stands most in need of being corrected. It is 
this — that individual Peers have, in many places, 
usurped the nomination of Members of Parlia- 
ment from those aggregate bodies of the com- 
monalty to which the Crown had originally grant- 
ed it. I have said individual Peers ; I am aware 
that in many places, individual Commoners have 
usurped the property in boroughs : but the usur- 
pation is most frequently by Peers ; and if the ac- 
quisition is first made by a Commoner, the power 



144 

which he has thereby acquired soon occasions 
him to be elevated to the Peerage. The mischief 
is also greater where the usurpation is by a Peer ; 
for after he has acquired this unconstitutional 
power, he exercises functions inconsistent with 
each other ; in impeachment, for example, the 
Commons are the accusers, and the Peers the 
Judges ; but if the Members of the House of 
Commons, who prefer the accusation, are nomi- 
nated by the Peers, and there is any truth in that 
maxim of the common law, Qui facit per alium, 
facit per se, those who are the Judges are at the 
same time the Accusers. Will any man say that 
this ought to be ? By the principles of our Con- 
stitution, the Commons are to vote the taxes, and 
the Peers have only a right to prevent the propo- 
sed tax from being imposed, by refusing their 
consent. This regulation was introduced to pro- 
tect the Commons from being taxed beyond what 
they could bear. But what becomes of this pro- 
tection, if the Peers are allowed to name the 
Members of the House of Commons ? Immode- 
rate taxation is the real cause of our present dis- 
tress ; and men call for a Reform of the House of 
Commons, because they feel that the power of 
taxing has been abused. 

Kings firt summoned to Parliament Represen- 
tatives from bodies of the Commonalty, that they 
might be protected against their great vassals. 
The great vassals saw this, and endeavoured to 
deprive the King of this defence, by compelling 



145 

these aggregate bodies of the Commonalty to de- 
pute to Parliament those men whom the several 
Peers might select. This attempt of the Peers 
seems to have been made at a very early period 
after Representatives of the Commons were first 
summoned to Parliament ; for in the first Parlia- 
ment of Edward I. he enacted provisions to res- 
strain this conduct in the Peers, The expressions 
in the act are these : " Forasmuch as Elections 
ought to be free, the King forbids, on pain of se- 
vere forfeiture, that any great man or other should, 
by force of arms, or by menaces, or by any sub- 
tle contrivance, disturb the freedom of Election. " 

The Commons of England now stand in need 
of this protection against the Peers, which was 
heretofore wanted by our Kings. I know it will 
be said, that the Peer, who nominates Members 
of the House of Commons, and afterwards sells 
* their votes to the Minister, pays his proportion of 
those taxes which are imposed. This may be 
true; but the gain of his immediate object induces 
him to forget the more distant evil. 

I decline giving instances in the present reign, 
of the abusive exercise of power thus acquired; but 
I will name one instance in the reign of George 
II.; and it is so generally known, that I am confident 
no man will dispute the correctness of the anec- 
dote. The post of Captain of the Band of Pen- 
sioners was vacant ; the King wished to give it to 
a gentleman whom he desired to have about his 
person. The Minister, Mr. Pelham, proposed 

n 2 



146 

to give it to another gentleman ; but after some 
struggle, the Minister yielded, and the post was 
destined for the King's friend. At this moment, 
before the place was actually given away, Lord 
Falmouth signified to the Minister, that he wish- 
ed to have this employment. Mr. Pelham re- 
monstrated with him that the place was destined 
for a personal friend of the King : the only an- 
swer which Lord Falmouth made, was : < c Sir, 
we are nine." This was the only answer which 
the Minister could obtain from him ; and because 
Lord Falmouth named nine Members of the 
House of commons, the King and the Minister 
were both obliged to summit. Lord Falmouth 
certainly paid his share of the taxes, which these 
nine Members assisted the Minister to impose. 
But this consideration was out- weighed by the im- 
mediate object which he obtained. 

The people of England have been gradually 
led, to demand a Reform in the House of Com- 
mons. I believe the late Earl of Chatham was 
among the first who suggested the necessity. 
He saw that the number of Members nominated 
by Proprietors and Patrons of Boroughs was so 
large, that the people were not protected against 
immoderate taxation. 

Towards the close of the American war, the 
people were led to observe that they had been en- 
gaged in that War, and subjected to heavy taxes, 
for the purpose of enforcing a claim of the House 
of Commons to tax their fellow-subjects in Ame- 



147 

rica. How far the House of Commons was en- 
titled to this right, was at least doubtful ; for the 
usage had always been for the Colonies to tax 
themselves in their own Provincial Assemblies ; 
and on questions of Constitutional Rights, usage 
has always been appealed to. The people of 
England found themselves disappointed in that 
hope which had been held out to them, that by 
procuring Revenue from America, taxation on 
the inhabitants of Great Britain would be diminish- 
ed. They experienced the very reverse of this 
hope which had been so held out to them. They 
found their own burthens immoderately increas- 
ed, and if the contest were persevered in, they 
saw no bounds to taxes. While the Country 
was in this situation, several eminent men point- 
ed out to the people, that immoderate taxation was 
the consequence of the existing state of the House 
Commons ; that of a Reform of that House was 
necessary ; that the people ought to be more 
efficiently represented in it. 

The Duke of Richmond was among those who 
stood foremost in recommending a Reform of 
Parliament. The remedy which he suggested, 
was Election by Universal Suffrage. 

If I am correct in what I have stated respect- 
ing the manner in which aggregate bodies of the 
Commonalty acquired the right of sending Re- 
presentatives to Parliament — the Duke of Rich- 
mond's plan would not have been a Reform, but a 
Revolution. 



148 

I will acknowledge that I have always heard 
with regret, the suggestion of this plan. It never 
could be a permanent Constitution. It might 
possibly be an intermediate state, through which, 
after much suffering, we might ultimately pass to 
a good Constitution. 

I have said, that the nomination to some seats 
in Parliament has been usurped by Peers ; I will 
explain what I mean by this assertion. In Bur- 
gage-tenement Boroughs, the right of electing 
Representatives to Parliament has been granted to 
every owner of a freehold interest, in a tenement 
within the Borough; and it has been decided, 
that the site of an ancient Burgage entitles the 
owner to a vote. A Peer purchases a majority 
of the Burgages or ancient sites. The night 
before the election, he sends down his dependants. 
The noble Lord's steward then delivers a Con- 
veyance of a Burgage to each person ; the next 
morning they are carried up to vote, and as soon 
as the return is made, the several Voters give 
back their conveyances to the steward, and they 
are heard of no more. The members thus re- 
turned, have not been elected by proprietors of a 
freehold in the Burgages; for the Conveyances 
transferred no interest to the several persons to 
whom they were made. Suppose the noble Lord 
had made these conveyances to prevent these 
Burgage-tenements from being taken in execution 
by his creditors; will any man say that these Con- 
veyances would have been valid against the credi- 



149 

tors? I believe there is no doubt as to the an- 
swer which must be given. The conveyances 
were fictitious and colourable : and as against the 
creditors they were void ; for they conveyed no 
property. But can they be void as against credi- 
tors, and valid as against the King? for the King- 
has a right to have two Members returned to Par- 
liament, elected by a majority of the owners of 
freehold interests in the several Burgages within 
the Borough. But if the two members returned 
are not elected by owners of freehold interests, 
they will sit in Parliament only by the nomination 
of the noble Peer himself. 

I believe there are about sixty Members of the 
House of Commons, who thus sit in Parliament 
by the nomination of proprietors of Burgage* 
tenement Boroughs. . A more considerable num- 
ber sit there by the nomination of Patrons of Bo- 
roughs. In these Boroughs the Right of Election 
is various. Sometimes in close Corporations; 
sometimes in Freemen ; sometimes in the payers 
of Scot and Lot; sometimes in Pot-boilers, with 
other various qualifications. The patron's merit 
with the Minister is, that he can supply him with 
the nomination to these seats. 

It will be asked, what mischief arises from all 
this. The answer is obvious. The Minister 
having thus obtained a command over a majority 
of the House of Commons, the people are depriv- 
ed of that protection against immoderate taxation, 
which the principles of our Constitution had se- 



150 

cured to them. Should it be asked, did the House 
of Commons ever, in fact, protect the people 
against immoderate taxes ? I answer, Yes. From 
the accession of the Tudors, to the commence- 
ment of the great rebellion, in the reign of Charles 
I. the people were protected from immoderate 
taxation by the House of Commons. Take, for 
example, the reign of Henry VIII. in disposition 
the most tyrannical of all our monarchs. Though 
they yielded to every other of his wishes, they 
would not grant him the people's money. In 
vain did he urge them to these grants ; he told 
them repeatedly that they cheated him; and in 
this he told them the truth ; for, by Feoffments to 
Uses, the profits which he was entitled to from 
estates held of him in capite y were withheld from 
him. It was not until the 27th year of his reign, 
that he could prevail on them to pass the Statute 
of Uses, by which the frauds which had been 
practised on him were prevented ; although he 
had been for many years urging the House of 
Commons to pass this statute. I know it may be 
said that the House of Commons consented to 
let him confiscate the property of the convents; 
but that property was not under their protection. 
They permitted Queen Mary to re-establish the 
Roman Catholic religion; but when she asked 
them to consent that the confiscated property of 
the convents should be restored, they refused it ; 
for that property was then become the property of 
laymen, and was under their protection, 



151 

At the commencement of the great rebellion in 
the time of Charles I. perhaps there was hardly 
any nation in Europe in which taxes were more 
moderate than in England. On one occasion 
during that reign, an unusual number of subsidies 
was demanded in a message from the Crown. 
The House was startled at the novelty ; but a 
Member reconciled them to the proposal by 
shewing them how very small a sum he, who 
was reputed a very rich man, should pay. Mr. 
Hampden had an estate of 2,000/. a year; the ship- 
money demanded from him was only twenty shil- 
lings : he resisted it ; not on account of the 
amount, but on account of the injustice of the de- 
mand. 

In the time of Charles I. Members were sent 
to the House of Commons from those Counties, 
Cities, and Boroughs, which send them now. 
Chester and Durham, I believe, did not send 
Members till the reign of Charles II. The al- 
teration, however, as to the places which have a 
right to send Members to Parliament, has been 
very little. But the Minister had not then dis- 
covered the means of influencing Elections. I 
have attributed immoderate taxation to the man- 
ner in which Members are returned to the House 
of Commons. It is not the Members returned 
who are alone to be corrupted, but every man 
who contributes to the Election of the Members 
is to be influenced ; and the present system ren- 
ders it necessary that the Crown should have 



152 

great patronage. Men call for retrenchment in 
the expenditure ; but if retrenchment were car- 
ried to a beneficial extent, the Crown would be 
left under the power of an Oligarchy, the most 
oppressive of all Governments. 

I have thus stated the mischief. What is the 
remedy ? My answer is, a House of Commons 
interested to keep down taxes. And to secure 
that the House of Commons should be interested 
to keep kovvn taxes, the Members should not 
only be men of property themselves, but should 
be elected by men who have that degree of pro- 
perty which may make them solicitous to keep 
taxes moderate. Retrenchment must be prece- 
ded by Reform. 

While Members are returned to Parliament by 
those Cities and Boroughs which now send them, 
is it practicable to secure that they shall be elect- 
ed by men of property ? I think it is. For in- 
stance, in the Burgage-tenement Boroughs, let 
every Elector swear, not only that he is proprie- 
tor of the Burgage-tenement for which he claims 
to vote, and has been so for a twelve-month pre- 
ceding the election, but let him also swear, that 
he has a landed estate of a moderate value, say 
20/. a year, in that county in which the Borough 
is situate ; and if the Electors are found to be be- 
low a certain number, suppose 100, let a con- 
current right of voting be given to every Free- 
holder within the County, who is owner of 100/. 
a-year Apply the same remedy of a landed quali- 



15& 

fication to other Cities and Boroughs, varying the 
circumstances according to the different Rights 
of Election. 

I think it would be also advisable that the 
qualifications of Electors for Counties should be 
raised from 40 shillings to 20/. a-year. This 
would preclude the necessity of Electors being 
carried to the Poll at the expense of the Candi- 
dates. I know that the remedy which I suggest, 
is the reverse of what is recommended by the Ad- 
vocates for Universal Suffrage ; but the mischief 
against which I wish to protect the people, is im- 
moderate taxation. 

The Members returned to the French Nation- 
al Assembly are elected by men, each of whom 
must have property to the value of 1800/. sterling. 
I think this a good Right of Election ; for the 
Electors have an interest to elect those who will 
keep taxes moderate. I know it may be said, 
that there are other articles which require to be 
defended as well as the Subject's property ; such 
as his life and liberty.* This is true ; but it is the 
property of the Subject which the Minister wants, 
and it is, therefore, the property which we ought 
most solicitously to guard ; and let it be remem- 
bered, that the Representative who has an inter- 
est to guard my property because he is at the same 
time guarding his own, will for the same reason, 
be interested to guard my life and liberty. 

I have heard it said, that Reform in theHouse of 
Commons would prevent those men who have 



154 

abilities, but are without property, from being 
Members of that House, and that these men are 
very useful. I am of a different opinion. I think 
they are rather mischievous than useful. I wish 
the House of Commons not to continue to exer- 
cise that share in the Executive Government 
which it has lately acquired. The Minister al- 
ways wishes the House of Commons to vote a 
previous approbation of that measure which he is 
about to adopt. By this means, he is protected 
from subsequent crimination. But the Nation is 
deprived of one of the most important advantages 
which it is entitled to expect from a House of 
Commons : viz. An Assembly watchful over the 
conduct of Ministers, and punishing them for 
acts injurious to their Country. 

I have given my opinion thus fully on the sub- 
ject of Reform ; because I am convinced, that 
either Reform or Revolution must soon take 
place. I wish for Reform and deprecate Revo- 
lution. 

I have thus ventured to give my opinion on the 
probability that a Reform of the House of Com- 
mons will take place in Great Britain. I have 
expressed my wish that a Reform may take place 
as being, the only means by which Revolution 
may be avoided. I have also expressed my opi- 
nion as to the manner in which Reform may be 
effected. Most certainly more regulations than 
those which I have suggested will be necessary. 

Members of the House of Commons were first 



155 

summoned to Parliament to protect the King 
against his great Nobles ; they are now wanted to 
protect the People against immoderate taxation. 
To induce them to afford this protection, they 
must themselves be interested; and to secure that 
they shall be interested, they must be elected by 
men who are payers of the taxes. With this view, 
the right of electing Members must be taken 
from many of the small Towns, and transferred 
to the inhabitants of large Towns. 

Some men have thought, that Triennial Parlia- 

lents might be of great benefit, and this is the 
Dnly Reform which the great Whig Families 
seem disposed to consent to. I cannot say that I 

*e any great advantage in the adoption of this 
measure,. It would render the House of Com- 
mons less suited to share in the exercise of the 
Executive Government. And this is the only 
benefit which I can see in it. I admit that this 
would be a benefit ; for while the House of Com- 
mons continue to possess that share in the Exe- 
cutive Government which they have been allowed 
to usurp, they are disqualified to watch over the 
conduct of the Executive Government, perhaps 
the most useful duty which they have to dis- 
charge. 



156 



CHAPTER VIIL 

On the State of Parties in England. 

The present political parties in England affect 
to rally under two names ; viz. Pittites and 
Foxites. Has either party any great Political 
object which it professes to wish to carry ? The 
Pittites profess no other object that of preventing 
changes ; the Foxites profess no definite object. 
The people therefore, view the two parties under 
the more intelligible names of the Ins and the 
Outs. Admit for the moment that both Mr. Pitt 
and Mr. Fox had great talents, and that both con- 
ferred much benefit on their country. It does not 
follow, that those who call themselves Pittites 
have the same talents, or have a right to claim, as 
heirs, the reward of his merits. The same an- 
swer may be given to the Foxites. The names 
are brought forward as noms de guerre, and to give 
splendour to the several parties. 

It may not be undeserving our attention, to 
consider how these parties have arisen ; Sir Ro- 
bert Walpole governed England by uniting the 
influence of the Crown to the Whig Party. I use 
the expression Whig Party, because, during that 
period, the Whigs were not a faction but a party ; 



157 

for they had a great political object; viz. To pre- 
vent the return of the Stuarts and the dreaded es- 
tablishment of Popery and despotism. 

Sir Robert Walpole fell ; he was succeeded by 
the Pelhams. Mr. Pelham was the man of the 
best understanding in that administration ; but he 
certainly was not a man of a superior mind. 
George II. wished to employ Lord Carteret, af- 
terwards Earl of Granville, as Secretary of State 
for Foreign Affairs. He was beyond all doubt, 
the ablest man of the day for that situation. But 
the Pelhams feared his abilities and compelled 
the King to remove him : the Pelhams carried on 
the War of 1741 feebly, and they ended it without 
wisdom ; for they left in existence the seeds of 
future disputes. The Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle 
must be considered as little more than a cessation 
of Arms ; it was a Truce rather than a Peace. 
Mr. Pelham died. His party continued in power 
under the auspices of his brother, the Duke of 
Newcastle. 

History hardly points out to us in any country 
or in any age, a Minister more incapable or more 
contemptible. — The War of 1756 burst forth, the 
Duke of Newcastle was under the necessity of 
assigning to Mr. Pitt the employment of Secre- 
tary of State, with the management of the War. 
The great abilities of this gentleman enabled him 
to carry on the War with much success; and the 
three last years of the reign of George II. are per- 

o 2 



158 

haps the most glorious period of our History since 
the accession of the Brunswick dynasty. 

In October, 1760, George III. succeeded to 
the Crown; he had been educated in aversion to 
those trammels in which his grandfather had been 
held ; and tutored from early life to wish to be his 
own minister, within a year after his accession, he 
removed Mr. Pitt, and in the following half year 
swept away the whole Pelham confederacy. He 
appointed the Earl of Bute his Prime Minister, 
who in the year following terminated the War. 
But the people were dissatisfied with the condi- 
tions of the peace. Pusillanimity induced the Earl 
of Bute to resign his situation. The King ap- 
pointed Mr. George Grenville his successor; but 
his Majesty soon found that this gentleman wish- 
ed to exercise the same controul over him, as the 
Pelhams had exercised over George II. 

He removed Mr. Grenville, and placed in the 
administration those gentlemen who had been 
Members of the Pelham confederacy. The Mar- 
quis of Rockingham was appointed Prime Minis- 
ter. The new Ministers on their accession to 
power, repealed the Stamp Act, and re-establish- 
ed tranquillity between Great Britain and her Co- 
lonies. Did the attempt to impose taxes on the 
Colonies by the vote of the British Parliament 
originate with Mr. Grenville, or with the King, 
and his own interior Cabinet? I cannot pretend 
to answer this question. I believe that there are 
papers in existence which may hereafter elucidate 



159 

the subject from the unremitted obstinacy with 
which the King persevered in this attempt to tax 
the Colonies; from the various artifices which he 
employed to induce his Ministers to assist him in 
the attempt ; from his boundless gratitude to those 
who supported him in this measure, and from his 
aversion to those who opposed it, we are naturally 
led to believe that it was the measure of the King 
himself. He removed the Rockingham adminis- 
tration ; and by dexterously playing one faction 
against another, he succeeded in his wish to re- 
vive the dispute with America. War was the 
consequence, till Peace was re-established by the 
acknowledgment of the Independence of the 
American Colonies. From 1766, when the Rock- 
inghams were removed from office, to the death 
of Lord Rockingham in 1782, the Partizans of that 
Noble Lord are entitled to be considered, not as a 
faction, but as a party, for they had a great public 
object in view ; viz. To prevent the rights of the 
British Colonists in America from being violated. 
On the death of Lord Rockingham they ceased 
to be a party, and became a faction ; for from that 
hour their efforts were no longer employed for the 
attainment of any great public object. Their ex- 
ertions were confined to the attainment of office 
and of emoluments for the members of their con- 
federacy. I have recapitulated these facts to show 
what I consider as the distinction between the 
expressions faction and party. It is a faction 
where the individuals who compose the confede- 



160 

racy have no other view than to obtain office and 
emoluments for themselves. It is a party, where 
the exertions of the individuals are directed to 
obtain a political object. Whenever those gen- 
tlemen who called themselves Foxites declare the 
public object which their efforts are directed to 
obtain, they will then deserve the name of a party. 
Until they declare this object they will be viewed 
in England only as a faction. It is idle to attempt 
to amuse the country by the name of Mr. Fox, as 
if they were the heirs of his merits; and if they 
mean to say that they pursue his opinions, they 
ought to specify those opinions. The gentlemen 
who form this faction, ought to recollect, that the 
Pelham faction never was popular in England. 
The Pelham administration was even less popular 
than that of Sir Robert Walpole. For although 
Sir Robert Walpole's administration was feeble 
and corrupt, yet it had a public object, viz. To 
preserve the Brunswick family on the Throne ; 
and Sir Robert Walpole succeeded in this object. 
His perseverance in the pacific system contributed 
much to his success; the Pelhams had no great 
object; the dread of the return of the Stuarts was 
extinguished; time and the Rebellion of 1745, 
had relieved the people from all apprehensions on 
that head. The great political object of Sir Ro- 
bert Walpole's administration had almost ceased 
to affect the nation. The Brunsvncks were be- 
lieved to be firmly established ; and the Pelham 
confederacy from the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle 



161 

could scarcely be considered as having a party 
object. 

I have said that from the death of the Marquis 
df Rockingham in the summer of 1782, the lead- 
ers of those who had composed his party scarcely 
pretended to say that their efforts were directed 
to the attainment of any public object. The 
maxim inculcated was, that you were to look to 
men, not to measures ; that when you had joined 
a party, your exertions should be directed to the 
support of that party, without enquiring into the 
particular measure immediately depending. In 
some of Mr. Burke's publications, I recollect this 
doctrine explicitly avowed. Speaking of those 
who sometimes voted with the Minister, and 
sometimes against him, he adds, " I hope to God 
the race is extinct." Even Mr. Fox incautiously 
adopted this sentiment ; speaking of an indepen- 
dent man, he defined him to be one whom nobody 
could depend upon. That you should look to 
men not to measures, might be a very good max- 
im for a faction ; and a very advantageous doctrine 
for Mr. Burke, who had contrived to obtain the si- 
tuation of the Guide of a faction. But it was not a 
doctrine calculated to induce the great body of the 
people to exert themselves in support of those 
who acted upon it. 

Review the measures of the Foxites from the 
death of Lord Rockingham, to the commence- 
ment of the year 1793, when England took part 
in the Crusade against French principles ; and let 



162 

any man say whether there was any one measure 
brought forward by the party likely to attract the 
co-operation of the country. The first measure 
which took place on the death of that lamented 
nobleman, was the complete and avowed separa- 
tion of his friends from those of the Earl of Shel- 
burne ; this measure proceeded wholly from Mr. 
Burke : it was to gratify his personal malice 
against the Earl of Shelburne, and to promote his 
views of governing the party under the nominal 
direction of the Duke of Portland ; I do not know 
that there was at that time any other man among 
the friends of the deceased Marquis who had 
personal ill-will to the Earl of Shelburne. I am 
certain that Charles Fox had not. The Duke of 
Richmond, Lord Keppel, and Genexal Conway 
remained in office with the Earl of Shelburne. 

The next measure was the coalition between 
Mr. Fox and Lord North. So far from this mea- 
sure having been likely to conciliate the good will 
of the Country, a long course of years was hardly 
sufficient to rescue Mr. Fox from the unpopulari- 
ty which it occasioned. 

The next measure was Mr. Burke's plan for 
* seizing the patronage of India, brought forward 
under the name of Mr. Fox's India Bill. No 
man will say that this conciliated the country 
when the Coalitionists were removed from office, 
they retained, during the first three months of the 
year 1784, a majority in the House of Commons. 
Many of those who had been attached to the par* 



163 

ty of the Marquis of Rockingham, were alarmed 
at the possible consequences of this situation. 
They were relieved from their fears by the decid- 
ed victory obtained by Mr. Pitt, in the ensuing 
general election, in the Spring, 1784. 

The next measure was the impeachment of 
Mr. Hastings. A measure brought forward sole- 
ly to gratify the malevolence of Mr. Burke ; it is 
scarcely possible but that the good sense of Mr. 
Fox must have pointed out to him the prejudice 
which his party would sustain from supporting 
this impeachment. He yielded to the influence 
of Mr. Burke. 

In the Autumn, 1788, the King became de- 
ranged. I will not enquire whether the doctrines 
advanced by Mr. Fox were correct or otherwise ; 
but they certainly were not popular. The King 
recovered, and the party remained under no in- 
considerable load of odium. 

At the close of the year 1792, Mr. Burke car- 
ried the party into the King's Camp, clamouring 
for the Crusade. The King received them with 
joy. Mr. Pitt, that he might retain his place sub- 
mitted to the King's wishes ; and War was re- 
solved on. Has the party either merited or con- 
ciliated the affections of the Country, by the share 
they took in driving us into this war ? Mr. Pitt 
died early in 1806, and the party again came into 
office, under a coalition with the Grenvilles and 
Lord Sidmouth. Did they gain any credit during 
the year that they were in office ? They are now 



164 

in opposition. Mr. Fox is no more ; but they 
endeavour to acquire popularity by assuming his 
name. They find that it is in vain ; they feel that 
the people are not with them. They complain, 
but unjustly ; for they have no right to expect 
that the people should exert themselves to place 
one set of individuals in office, in the room of 
another. 

Would they engage their Country's support, 
let them bring forward some great public mea- 
sure which the Country may be interested to ob- 
tain. All men, who give themselves the trouble 
to reflect, see that the Reform of the House of 
Commons is the only measure which can relieve 
us from our difficulties. Immoderate taxation, 
the result of the unnecessary wars of the Reign 
of George III. is the cause of our embarrassments; 
and that immoderate taxation has been occasion-, 
ed by the House of Commons, being composed 
of men not interested to protect the property of 
the people. 

It is well known, that the leaders of the Foxite 
party are among those who are the most averse to 
Reform ; that they rank among the usurpers of the 
nomination to seats in Parliament, and that by 
their coming into office all hope of Reform would 
be at an end. How then can they expect that 
the people should wish to see them in office ? I 
may be told, perhaps, that Mr. Fox was himself 
a great advocate for a Reform of the House of 
Commons. Yes, this is true. But at the General 



165 

Election in 1780, he accepted the situation of 
Commander-in-Chief of the Political Forces of 
the Rockingham Party. From that hour, he ceas- 
ed to be the sincere advocate of Reform, He 
could no longer sincerely endeavour to obtain Re- 
form, without being disloyal to that party into 
whose service he had entered. It may be said 
that he voted for Reform subsequently to 1780. 
I admit it ; so did Mr. Pitt, who, antecedently to 
his being in office, had certainly been sincerely 
desirous of a Reform of Parliament. But after 
Mr. Pitt had accepted office, he would, by bring- 
ing forward a Reform of Parliament, have thwart- 
ed the views of the King, as much as Mr. Fox 
would, by a similar measure, have thwarted the 
views of the Rockinghams ; both, therefore, were 
equally insincere. 

Reform is the only measure which can relieve 
the country. Retrenchment, not preceded by 
Reform, is impracticable. Profuse expenditure is 
wanted, not merely to feed Members of Parliament, 
but to feed those who have a share in making 
Members of Parliament. Deprive the Crown of 
the means of purchasing, and your Government 
instantly becomes an Oligarchy, composed of 
Proprietors and Patrons of Boroughs: And it 
cannot be too often repeated, that of all forms of 
government, Oligarchy is the most oppressive. 
Reform is necessary: and either Reform or 
Revolution will take place ; Universal Suffrage 
would be Revolution. It is possible, that a good 

p 



160 

Government might grow out of it; but the parox- 
ysms by which we should arrive at the crisis, 
would be dreadful. 

When Earl Grey, in 1792, established the So- 
ciety of the Friends of the People, for the avow- 
ed purpose of bringing men together to declare 
their opinions on the necessity of a Reform of 
Parliament, I acknowledge that I, at that time, 
thought that it would be practicable to Reform the 
House of Commons, without departing much 
from the present form of Borough representation; 
— that we might Reform the different classes of 
Boroughs according to the different diseases which 
existed in them ; — that we might proceed gradu- 
ally, little by little, en tatonnant, ever keeping in 
mind that maxim of the wise physician, Vel pro- 
desse, vel non obesse, as the first object of our 
attention. I presumed to point out to that Socie- 
ty the class of Burgage-tenement Boroughs ; an 
Address was voted to the House of Commons, 
stating the number of Members who sat in that 
House by the nomination of Proprietors and Pa- 
trons. But it was seen, that the correction of this 
abuse would be injurious to the interests of the 
leaders of the faction of the great Whig Fami- 
lies ; and all further attempts at Reform of Parlia- 
ment were abandoned. Had Parliament been re- 
formed at that time, we might prossibly have 
avoided the Crusade against French principles. 

Reform will take place. To render it benefi- 
cial to the Country, it must be a complete correc- 



167 

tion of the existing abuses. 1 da not mean by 
Universal Suffrage, but by a Reform which may 
place the House of Commons in a situation to 
protect the property of the people. The French 
Revolution has given us an example of an Assem- 
bly adequate to the discharge of this duty, viz. an 
Assembly elected by men, payers of direct taxes 
to such an extent, that none can be Electors, ex- 
cept those who are so affected by the payment, 
that they are interested that taxation should be 
moderate. I am persuaded that such a Reform 
will sooner or later take place ; though it is possi- 
ble that resistance to such a Reform may occasion 
it to be preceded by Revolution. 

The Bourbons, the Nobles, and the Fanatics 
may attempt to re-establish the ancien regime in 
France. They will fail. The pillars on which 
the fabric stood are reduced to powder. No art 
can again cement them into solid masses. If a 
representative Government should cease to exist 
in France, it must be succeeded by a Military 
despotism. 

In Spain, though the present efforts should fail, 
yet the Cortes will ultimately be established. 

In Germany, the intelligence of the people will 
probably prevail against all the efforts of the Holy 
Alliance; and Representative Government will be 
the consequence. 

Can any man suppose, that with such examples 
under its eye, England will long submit to the 
usurped power of Proprietors and Patrons of Bo- 



168 

roughs ? Let it be recollected, that this usurped 
Power is odious to Royalty, insulting to Aristo- 
cracy, and oppressive to the People. 

There are among those who call themselves 
Foxites, men who possess both wisdom and in- 
tegrity. Let them declare that their efforts are 
directed to obtain an object in which their Coun- 
try is interested. Their Country will rally round 
them, and Revolution may be averted. 



CHAPTER IX. 

On the Duration of Papal Power. 

I shall consider this not as a religious, but as 
a political subject. The doctrines of the Catho- 
lic Church may remain long after the power of 
the Pope is destroyed. I shall consider the ques- 
tion purely as it regards the duration of Papal 
Power. It seems to me that this power cannot 
subsist much longer, either in France or Germa- 
ny. I doubt whether it can continue much long- 
er in Spain and Portugal : — it will fall in Italy 
whenever that country is formed into one king- 
dom ; an event, perhaps, not very distant : and 
with regard to Ireland, where three out of four of 
the inhabitants are Catholics, the power and the 
influence of the Pope of Rome will be at an end, 
whenever the British Government has the good 



169 

sense to become the pay-master of the Catholic 
Clergy. I say it must fall in France. The 
wealth of the Church has been sweept away ; and 
its power has vanished with its wealth. Tythes 
have been abolished ; and having now been dis- 
continued for more than thirty years, can never 
be re-established ; the lands of Bishops and Con- 
vents have been confiscated ; and the present pos- 
sessors will never submit to be deprived of them. 
The officiating Ministers of the Church must 
henceforth receive their salaries from the Execu- 
tive Government ; and from that circumstance 
must be dependent on that Executive Govern- 
ment. Whenever a King of France abandons the 
wish of re-establishing the power lately possessed 
by the Clergy, he becomes really and substantial- 
ly the Supreme Head of the Church ; or, to use 
an expression applied by Roger Bacon to our 
King Henry VIII. — " He starts up a King with 
a Pope in his belly." 

No inconsiderable part of Germany remained 
under Ecclesiastical Sovereigns, down to the com- 
mencement of the late Revolution in France ; I 
believe they have been every where destroyed, 
and their territories assigned to temporal Princes. 
This circumstance must have greatly diminished 
the influence of the Roman Pontiff. Princes and 
Nobles no longer look up to the Church as a pro- 
vision for their younger branches. Intelligence 
must gain ground ; and though Catholic doctrines 
in Religion may remain, Papal Power must fall 

p 2 



170 

In Spain, though the present efforts to re-establish 
,a Free Constitution should fail, yet it is manifest 
that intelligence has gained such ground in that 
Country, that the Cortes, with a Free Constitu- 
tion, will ultimately be established. The Papal 
Power will be inconsistent with that Free Consti- 
tution ; it will fall, and probably will be accom- 
panied with the confiscation of a large portion of 
the wealth of the Church. This event will pro- 
duce the same advantages in Spain, as have been 
produced by similar confiscations in England and 
in France : viz. The existence of a middle class 
of Land-proprietors. Portugal will follow the ex- 
ample of Spain. Most probably the Spanish Colo- 
nies in America will do the same. 

I have said, the formation of Italy into one king- 
dom, is an event probably not very distant ; and I 
believe that I am correct in my opinion. Italy 
has been harassed by foreign invaders ever since 
the close of the fifteenth century. When Charles 
VIII. King of France, invaded Italy, about the 
year 1490, he found the country under the power 
of various Governments ; but every where in a 
state of great prosperity. From that time to the 
present, it has been desolated by Spaniards, Ger- 
mans, and French ; every sensible Italian must 
wish to see his country rescued from these inva- 
ders ; but it cannot be formed into one kingdom 
without the abolition of the power of the Pope. 
The Papal power was originally established with 
great political wisdom. The acquisition of land- 



17i 

ed property, and of sovereignty, were among the 
marked instances of its sagacity. Its power will 
fall with the loss of landed property and sove- 
reignty. 

I have said, in a former place, that the Execu- 
tive Government in France will, at a future period, 
derive much influence from the Funds for the pay. 
ment of the Clergy being entirely at its disposal. 
That this power has not hitherto been felt, be- 
cause the Bourbons have hitherto entertained a 
wish that the power of the Clergy should be re- 
established. But the French Clergy cannot again 
be put in possession of their landed estates. 
Those estates are now in the possession of the 
Laity, and are divided among so many proprie- 
tors, that any attempt to wrest those lands from 
them must fail of success ; and those who made 
the attempt, would probably fall the victims of 
their own foil v. Everv Ecclesiastic must be de- 
pendent upon that Government which, by with- 
holding payment of his salary, can reduce him to 
poverty. The Christian Church was established 
with much political wisdom. Its founders ever 
had in view, to make it independent of the Exe- 
cutive Government ; and it bribed the existing 
Government for the time being, by its readiness 
to support the immediate views of such Govern- 
ment. The Clergy were every where invested 
with landed estates ; they were sensible how much 
their political influence would be increased by the 
possession of land, instead of being dependent on 
Government for salaries. 



172 

When the Reformation took place in England, 
the property of the Convents was seized ; and 
Queen Elizabeth obtained considerable portions 
of episcopal property by forced exchanges. A 
celebrated letter of the Queen, on this subject, to 
a Bishop of Ely, is preserved in the British Mu- 
seum. I have had occasion to see proofs of her 
having taken large portions of the lands of the 
Bishoprick of Lincoln, under pretence of similar 
exchanges : and there is no doubt that she plun- 
dered many bishopricks in the same manner. 
The practice was carried so far by Queen Eliza- 
beth, that on the accession of James I. the church 
of England had sufficient influence to procure an 
Act to be passed, to prevent the Crown from 
making exchanges in future, with Bishops. The 
English Clergy are so sensible of the political ad- 
vantage of possessing lands, rather than monied 
property, that in case of a bequest of money, up- 
on condition that the trustees of Queen Anne's 
bounty should add a sum of equal value, the 
trustees will never permit the money to remain in 
the funds, but insist that it shall be laid out in the 
purchase of lands; and they require this, although 
they are sensible that the Ecclesiastic intended 
to be benefited, would receive double the income 
from the Funds that he can expect to receive from 
land : and although another inconvenience ensues 
from this doctrine, that the money must be laid 
out in land, viz. That the Courts of Law have 
resolved, that these bequests are within the Sta- 



173 

tute of Mortmain, and they are frequently void, in 
consequence of the directions of that Statute not 
having been observed. The great objection to 
the Emancipation of the Catholics in Ireland is, 
that the Pope will always retain influence over the 
Catholic Clergy, and the Catholic Clergy over 
those of their Church. But this objection would 
vanish, if the Catholic Clergy were paid by the 
Executive Government. 

Consider the state of Ireland. Among four 
millions of inhabitants, three millions are Catho- 
lics ; and of the remaining million, six hundred 
. thousand are computed to be Dissenters, and four 
hundred thousand only of the Church of England. 
Yet all the funds allotted for the maintenance of 
Ecclesiastical Ministers, are confined to those of 
the Church of England. Is this equitable? Would 
it not be more advantageous that these funds 
should be employed for the maintenance of the 
Clergy of all those who profess the Christian re- 
ligion? It will not be denied that all ought to 
receive religious instruction. Whether a man 
believes in transubstantiation, or does not believe 
in it, is a matter of little importance to the State ; 
provided his opinion on this subject does not lead 
him to have political connections injurious to the 
interests of his country. 

It is this apprehension which leads men to fear 
Catholic Emancipation. We had just reason to 
fear the power of the Pope during the reigns of 
the Stuarts : habituated to that fear, we cannot 



174 

bring ourselves to believe, that if any such danger 
still exists, it is easy to guard against it. Suppose 
Bishopricks and Chapters as they became vacant 
in Ireland, were not filled up, and their revenues 
vested, for a few years, in trustees, to be employ- 
ed under the direction of the Executive Govern- 
ment, for the maintenance of the Clergy of every 
branch of the Christian religion, while the Ro- 
man Catholic Clergy received maintenance ac- 
cording to the pleasure of their own government 
— would there not be an end to all well-grounded 
fear of Foreign influence? There are many pa- 
rishes in Ireland, in which the inhabitants are al- 
most all Catholics ; yet the owner of the advowson 
is obliged to present a Clergyman of the Church 
of England. Would it not be equitable, that the 
incumbent on such a benefice, should be obliged 
to contribute to the payment of Ministers for Ca- 
tholics and Dissenters? I am well aware that 
the Clergy of the Church of England will be in- 
dignant at such a proposal ; but its adoption would 
be beneficial to my country. 

I will go one step further. I think it highly 
probable that, ere long, a plan, somewhat of this 
nature, will be adopted in the British Empire; 
particularly in Ireland. It is already established 
in France. A civil War is ready to break out in 
Spain, between the King and the Clergy on one 
side, and the Army and the Cortes on the other. 
Should the latter be successful, much of the 
Church property would probably be confiscated; 



175 

and the Ministers of the Church in Spain, in the 
same manner as those in France, would receive 
their payments from Government. When such 
a Revolution has taken place in France and Spain, 
it is probable that the Clergy of the Church of 
England would be allowed to retain that political 
power which they now possess? It may be said, 
that they are always readily subservient to the im- 
mediate views of the Crown. This may be true t 
but a more equitable distribution of emoluments 
would be beneficial to the Crown, and could 
scarcely be disapproved of by any one. 

Seven hundred livings, in the King's gift, are 
left at the disposition of the Lord Chancellor. 
Five hundred of these are said to yield very small 
emoluments to their several incumbents. If six 
of the most opulent Bishopricks were not filled 
up, as they severally became vacant, and their 
incomes for a certain term of years vested in trus- 
tees for the purpose of creating a fund, to be em- 
ployed under the King's direction, in augmenting 
the emoluments of the incumbents of these bene- 
fices, could any man complain of this ? When 
the Bishopricks of Winchester and Durham be- 
come vacant, they will be disposed of by the 
Crown, either to serve the views of a Minister, 
or to gratify some Court favourite. Would not 
the influence of the Crown be more increased, and 
the interests of the country more advanced, by 
the augmentation of small benefices in the gift of 
the Crown, in the manner I have suggested ? 



176 



CHAPTER X. 



On the Consequences likely to result from the Es- 
tablishment of the United States of America. 



These States form a Federative Republic. 
They have neither King, nor Nobility, nor Esta- 
blished Church. The English language, and the 
English love of Liberty, prevail through the 
whole confederacy. The facility with which land- 
ed property may be acquired, and brought into 
cultivation, gives to the inhabitants a disposition 
to migrate ; a propensity which will much facili- 
tate the extension of agriculture, and the rapid 
population of the Country. 

On the Sea Coast, the active spirit of the people 
leads them to Commerce, and the Fisheries ; and 
when compelled to become a Military State, they 
have shewn the most courageous exertions. It is 
visible, that they are capable of presenting them- 
selves as a formidable Naval Power. Great Bri- 
tain, France, and Spain, are the only naval pow- 
ers of much consideration now in Europe ; and 
even the most formidable of these — I mean Great 
Britain — would find it difficult to carry on a Naval 
War with the United States of America. It is 
true, Great Britain, at present, possesses on that 



177 

Continent, one Naval Port and Arsenal : viz. 
Halifax. If deprived of this, Great Britain would 
find it extremely difficult to carry on a Naval War 
on the Coast of America ; and British America 
could not long be defended, except at an expense 
which could not be borne. 

The United States of America may now be 
considered as holding a high rank in the inter- 
course between themselves and the several States 
of Europe. The facility of acquiring landed pro- 
perty, naturally leads the people to apply them- 
selves to Agriculture, rather than to Manufac- 
tures ; and it is more for the interest of the Ame- 
ricans to bring land into cultivation, than to es- 
tablish manufactures. The injudicious conduct 
of the British Government has, in many places, 
forced the Americans to establish manufactures: 
and machinery will be used with more advantage 
in a country where the population is thin, than 
it can be in a country like Great Britain, where 
the manufacturing population may perhaps be too 
great. 

The application of the Steam Engine to the 
navigation of rivers, affords an advantage to Ame- 
rica, almost beyond calculation. The inhabitants 
on the upper parts of her great rivers, will easily 
be supplied with every thing that commerce can 
present. 

The United States will be divided. If the 
whole continent of North America formed but 
one State, it could only be controuled by a Des. 



178 

potic Government ; but the happiness of man re- 
quires that Governments should be free. One of 
the circumstances which at present contributes 
the most to the happiness of the inhabitants of the 
United States is, that they have occasion for so 
little government. The facility with which sub- 
sistence can be acquired, removes the temptation 
to criminality. Whenever a division of the Unit- 
ed States takes place, most probably it will not 
be, in the first instance, a separation of the North- 
ern from the Southern States ; though this sepa- 
ration will, most probably, at one time or other, 
take place. But the first division will probably 
be, of the Western States from the Eastern, 
That immense plain, which is watered by the 
Mississippi, with her attendant streams, is natural- 
ly separated from the Eastern States by ranges of 
mountains ; and the difference of soil, climate, 
produce, and occupation, will create that opposi- 
tion of interest which leads to separation. But 
though this separation may be attended with 
bloodshed, it will ultimately be beneficial to the 
Country. 

There is, however, a danger, which perhaps 
the wisdom of their Government will not be able 
to avert : I mean, that they may be tempted by 
the gold and silver of Spanish America, to relin- 
quish agricultural pursuits, and attempt the con- 
quest of Mexico. They will succeed ; and suc- 
cess will be a misfortune. There are reasons to 
believe, that the ancestors of those whom the 



179 

Spaniards found in possession of Mexico, on their 
arrival in that country, had migrated from the 
more northern parts of America. It is said, that 
in Kentucky there are proofs that the country 
must, at some remote period, have been inhabit- 
ed by men far more advanced in civilization, than 
those Indians whom we found there. But whe- 
ther this opinion is well or ill-founded, there is lit- 
tle doubt but that the Americans, whenever they 
choose it, will be able to penetrate into Mexico. 
What may be the character of the inhabitants of 
Spanish America, when the present motley race 
is crossed with American blood ? This is a 
question which we cannot answer. But it is to 
Great Britain that the power of the United States 
is most formidable. They can, to a considerable 
degree, controul our intercouse with Jamaica : — 
they may become the ally of the Black Popula- 
tion in Saint Domingo : — they may even acquire 
the possession of Cuba : — and in every part of 
the world they will be our rivals in commerced 

It is much to be regretted, that those among 
us who had in vain attempted to deprive the Ame- 
ricans of their rights, should have persevered in 
their hatred to them, after the contest was termi- 
nated. Unfortunately, this was the case. The 
same language, the same love of liberty, descent 
from the same common ancestors, to which I 
might add, similitude of laws, (for the Americans 
still retain those laws which they had carried with 
them from England) would have rendered arnica- 



180 

ble intercourse between the two countries, of easy 
establishment. I believe that this was the opi- 
nion of the Earl of Shelburne. I believe he open- 
ly declared, that the intercouse between the two 
nations ought to be re-established, as nearly as 
possible the same, as it had existed before the se- 
paration. Unfortunately, he was not listened to. 
Injuries, insults, and affected contempt, have ex- 
cited sentiments in the breasts of the Americans, 
which it may be difficult to eradicate ; and Great 
Britain now, exhausted by her Crusade against 
French principles, may be obliged to submit to 
humiliating concessions. 



CHAPTER XI. 

On the Effects likely to be produced by the French 
Revolution on other Nations. 

1 have considered the effects which the French 
Revolution must have in France itself. I will now 
consider the effects which it will probably pro- 
duce on other nations. But in doing this, it will 
be necessary to observe circumstances which 
now exist, or are likely very soon to be in ex- 
istence. 

The American War established a Representa- 
tive Government, in what are now called the 



181 

United States of America. The French Revolu- 
tion has established a Representative Government 
in France. It is probable that we shall soon see a 
Representative Government in Spain ; and Re- 
presentative Governments in the continental pro- 
vinces of Spanish America, will perhaps be esta- 
blished in imitation of their parent country. Cuba 
deserves a distinct consideration. It will either 
be taken possession of by the United States of 
America, or by England ; or become an Inde- 
pendent state : for its size and population enable 
it to assume this form. 

When the Spanish Empire, in Europe and 
America, shall have assumed the form which I 
have mentioned, can we suppose that Portugal 
will remain in its present situation ? Is there not 
every reason to expect, that Portugal and Brazil 
will not long remain under the same Government? 
If the King returns to Portugal, he will lose the 
Sovereignty of Brazil ; and if he remains in Bra- 
zil, Portugal will shake off his government. Pro- 
bably her new Government will be Representa- 
tive ; and we shall see a Portuguese Cortes re- 
called to power, as we have seen it in Spain. 

I shall be told, all this depends on Ferdinand's 
Government being overthrown ; but it is manifest, 
that Ferdinand's Government cannot be durable. 
Even though it should resist the present shocks, 
the general wish of the people to see the Cortes 
re-called, and a Constitution established, must ul- 
timately prevail. 

q.2 



182 

Germany already feels the effects of the French 
Revolution. The desire of a Representative Go- 
vernment is every where prevalent. The dimi- 
nution of the wealth and power of the Roman 
Catholic Clergy in Germany, must have great 
effect in producing changes in that country. Be- 
fore the French Revolution, much sovereign pow- 
er was possessed by the Catholic Clergy in Ger- 
many ; I believe they are now every where de- 
prived of Sovereignty. Their dominions are 
assigned to neighbouring Princes. 

Even Italy will be affected by the French Re- 
volution. The principles of Liberty have been 
discussed, and are understood in that country. 
The fall of the Papal Power, which cannot long 
be deferred, will necessarily occasion that country 
to assume a new form. 

The human mind trembles at the contemplation 
«>f these probable events : — 

"Through what variety of untried being, 
Through what new scenes and changes must we pass? 
The wide, the unbounded prospect lies before us, 
Hut shadows, clouds, and darkness rest upon it." 

The changes which I have alluded to, will not 
only affect the Government of Nations ; it will 
greatly affect their intercourse with each other. 
The Spanish Provinces on the Western side of 
South America, will open a trade with India and 
China ; they will be supplied from those countries 

a ith silk and cotton manufactures, because they 



183 

oan be supplied from thence, at a cheaper rate 
than they can from Europe, 

Even the Black and Mulatto nations of Saint 
Domingo, ought not to be left out of our conside- 
ration. They will probably extend themselves 
over the whole of that island ; perhaps even to 
Porto Rico. Perhaps the time is not far remov- 
ed, when posterity may see the inhabitants of the 
four great Antilles, one motley race ; in which, 
however, it is most likely that the Mulatto will 
gradually predominate. 

There is a circumstance in the changes already 
occasioned by the American and French Revolu- 
tions, and which will probably be found in the 
changes about to take place : viz. that these 
changes will not be the effect of conquest, but the 
result of insurrections of the People against their 
Governments ; whereas, almost all the other Re- 
volutions which we read of in history, have been 
the consequence of conquest. The Persian, the 
Macedonian, the Roman Empires, were establish- 
ed by conquest. The Roman Empire was de- 
stroyed by conquerers from the Northern and 
Eastern parts of the world. Revolutions, the re- 
sult of conquest, necessarily occasion a change in 
the race of inhabitants. Most probably the North- 
ern Conquerors of the Roman Empire, did not 
extirpate, but became blended with the inhabi- 
tants ; for we every where find a language evi- 
dently derived from the Latin. I believe, in every 
part of France, the common people retain their 



184 

patois ; a corruption of the language they used be- 
fore they were conquered. In our island, the 
Saxons extirpated or exterminated the Britons ; 
and therefore we have no British words left in our 
language. The Normans did not extirpate, and 
our language is consequently a mixture of Saxon 
and French ; the Latin words being derived to us 
through the French. 

I believe it will be found, that all the Revolu- 
tions in Asia and Africa, as well as in Europe, 
have been produced by conquest. What diffe- 
rence may be occasioned, from the Revolutions 
in our days being produced by insurrections of 
the People, and not by conquest, I cannot say ; 
nor can I venture to form an opinion, on the pro- 
bable consequences of the fall of the Roman 
Catholic Church ; for their wealth and power will 
fall together. The Bramin says, " that sin came 
into the world by the confusion of casts." I 
hope the motley race of inhabitants about to occu- 
py so large a portion of America, will not verify 
this opinion. 



185 



CHAPTER XII. 



On the British Possessions in India. 

The India Company was established solely 
with a view to trade ; and as the voyage to India 
was long, and supposed to be attended with great 
danger, an exclusive privilege of trading beyond 
the Cape of Good Hope was granted to the Com- 
pany. 

About the year 1740, the Mogul Empire fell 
to pieces, in consequence of the invasion of Nadir 
Shah, Kouli Khan. The different Governors, or 
Nabobs of Provinces, seized the Government of 
different districts. In the province of Arcot, or, 
as it is generally called, the Arcot Carnatic, the 
French India Company supported the claims of a 
native named Chunda Saheb, and soon discover- 
ed the inferiority of the native troops, when op- 
posed to Europeans. The French acquired do- 
minion rapidly ; this roused the jealousy of the 
English India Company. They set up claims on 
behalf of another native, called Mohammed Ali. 
After various success, the cause of Mohammed 
Ali prevailed. 

About 1756, the English Factory in Bengal 
was plundered by Sujah Dowlah, the Nabob of 
that provice; and the Europeans found in it treat- 



186 

ed with great cruelty. The British Troops, which 
had placed Mohammed AH on the Throne of 
Arcot, were transported to Bengal ; Sujah Dovv- 
lah was defeated, and the Sovereignty of a large 
district seized by the India Company. Much 
wealth was acquired for the Civil and Military 
Servants, as well as for the India Company, by 
this Conquest ; and from that hour, the desire of 
extending the India Company's acquisitions in 
India, has never been relinquished. 

It is said, that the India Company possesses 
Sovereignty over 80,000,000 of people in India, 
and Revenue to the amount of 17,000,000/. ster- 
ling a-year. Ceylon, the Isle of France, and the 
Cape of Good Hope have been obtained as ap- 
pendages necessary to the safety of their Indian 
Empire. A question naturally occurs, what bene- 
fit accrues to Great Britain from these Indian pos- 
sessions ? They furnish neither army, nor navy, 
nor revenue, to be employed in Europe for the 
service of Great Britain : on the contrary, they re- 
quire soldiers to be annually sent from Great Bri- 
tain to India. Very commonly they require a 
navy, and sometimes even pecuniary assistance. 

But it is said, that the wealth acquired by the 
civil and military servants is remitted to Great 
Britain, and has much contributed to give activi- 
ty to improvements. I am not prepared absolute- 
ly to deny this assertion. To a certain extent, it 
may be true ; but I doubt whether this benefit 
has compensated the mischief introduced by our 



187 

Indian acquisitions. When we see 80,000,000 
of subjects at the distance of 10,000 miles, go- 
verned by twenty-four mercantile characters resi- 
dent in Leadenhall Street, we are naturally led to 
say, the Government of Empire cannot require so 
much skill as we common people generally be- 
lieve. And the Board of Controul engrafted on 
the Court of Directors must rather contribute to 
increase than to diminish embarrassment. 

But the great advantage accruing from these 
Indian possessions, if it be an advantage — is pa- 
tronage. Much of this patronage is disposed of 
by the Ministers of the Crown ; some remains 
with the India Directors. When Jugurtha took 
his last view of Rome, he exclaimed : u Vale 
venalis civitas, moxperitura si emptor em mveneris? 
Is not the same exclamation applicable almost with 
equal truth to those who elect the House of Com- 
mons ? Is it not a fact that Members have sat 
in that House for seats purchased for them by an 
Indian Prince ? 

Has it not been acknowledged publicly, that a 
Bengal writership was given by the Minister to 
one of his friends that he might sell it, and with 
the produce purchase a seat in the House of Com- 
mons ? The French call us, arte nation pirate et 
boutiquiere ; and has not Indian patronage pecu- 
liarly contributed to give us that venal money-lov- 
ing character, which the French attribute to us ? 
But the material consideration is, what circum- 
stances will accompany our abandonment of these 



188 

possessions ? for abandoned they must be, soon- 
er or later. Every acquisition renders it more ne- 
cessary for us to extend our conquests ; we are 
now told by every man returned from India, u you 
must have the whole, or you must relinquish all 
that you possess." 

And where are the boundaries of that whole? 
To whatever extent your acquisitions are carried, 
you will still have neighbours the object of your 
fears. Many are now apprehensive that you have 
already approached so near to the frontiers of 
Russia, that on any difference with that power, 
her forces may be employed to invade India ; but 
as there are three States, viz. the Seiks, Zemaun 
Shah, and Persia, between your possessions and 
the Russian frontiers, I own I have never felt any 
apprehensions of an attack from Russia. But 
your empire is too large to be under the controul 
of one Government ; you will be ruined by the 
expense of repressing insurrections which will be 
constantly renewed. Aureng Zebe ruined the 
Mogul Empire by the acquisition of the Decan ; 
from the time that he had made that acquisition, 
the Empire was too large for Government ; you 
may fear the same fate, and the loss of your Indian 
Empire may be preceded by struggles destructive 
of your happiness. 

It may be asked, does not the possession of 
Empire in India counterbalance the loss which 
you have sustained in America ? I have no 
hesitation in answering, No. Your Continental 



189 

possessions in America added to the strength of 
Great Britain, they enabled you to command the 
French and Spanish West India Islands. Even 
the treasures of the Continent of Spanish Ame- 
rica, could not be safely brought to Europe, 
while you were disposed to prevent it. Your 
Continental possessions in America could not 
be attacked by sea ; and whatever complaints 
might be made of murders committed by the 
Indians, it was manifest, that the Indians, like the 
wild beasts of the forest, would either be extirpa- 
ted or exterminated in proportion as the agricul- 
turist advanced. 

Your American Empire was inattackable ; it 
was so happily united to your European posses- 
sions, that it rendered you the most formidable 
power in the world. But your Indian Empire is a 
source of weakness ; you are under constant ap- 
prehension, that it may be attacked by some fo- 
reign enemy. 

While you keep it, you must be always ex- 
tending its limits ; for both your civil and milita- 
ry servants derive immediate wealth from new 
acquisitions. The very size of the Empire must 
ultimately destroy it. But there is another cir- 
cumstance in the present state of your Indian 
Empire, which must necessarily create great em- 
barrassment. This Empire has been acquired 
by a Company of Merchants ; and they retained 
the character of exclusive trader, after they had 
assumed that of sovereign. They have now re- 

R 



190 

signed the character of exclusive trader. They 
allow British subjects to trade concurrently with 
themselves ; but retain the sovereignty. Sove- 
reign and trader, are characters incompatible : as 
traders, they will be defrauded; and as sovereigns, 
they will oppress those who are their rivals in trade. 
The present condition of the India Company, 
therefore, cannot long subsist. They must con- 
tent themselves with one character ; they must 
either be sovereigns or traders. 



CHAPTER XIIL 

Impeachment of Mr. Hastings. 

1 have hitherto only slightly alluded to the 
Impeachment of Mr. Hastings. But of the twen- 
ty-two charges exhibited against that gentleman, 
two, viz. the first and the third, are of such histo- 
rical importance, that I think it may be advisable 
to state them accurately. 

The first was denominated the Rohilla Charge: 
the latter the Benares Charge. I have already 
mentioned, that on the dissolution of the Mogul 
Empire about the year 1740, by the invasion of 
Nadir Shah, the Governors of Provinces in many 
places assumed the Sovereignty. A chieftain of 
Mountaineers, known by the name of the Rohillas. 



191 

usurped the Sovereignty of a district, to which, 
from his own tribe, he gave the name of the Ro- 
hilla Country. This district was a rich soil, and 
had about two millions of inhabitants. The Ro- 
hilla Chief and his descendants had possesed this 
Sovereignty, from the first usurpation in 1742, to 
their expulsion in 1774, by Sujah Dowlah, the 
Nabob of Oude. In the summer of 1773, Mr. 
Hastings, at that time President of the Council in 
Bengal, had an interview with Sujah Dowlah in 
the upper provinces ; I believe at Benares. The 
Directors of the India Company had pointed out 
to Mr. Hastings two objects which they were 
very solicitous to obtain. The first was a larger 
payment from Sujah Dowlah for the use of their 
troops whenever they were employed in his ser- 
vice. The second was, to prevail on Sujah Dow- 
lah to purchase from them two Provinces known 
by the names of Corah and Allahabad When the 
heir apparent of the great Mogul, called the Shah 
Zaclee, had been received under the protection of 
the India Company, they had assigned to the 
Prince the possession of these two Provinces for 
his maintenance. After having possessed these 
Provinces for some few years, the young Prince 
was persuaded to attempt to recover the throne 
of Delhi. To enable him to execute this project, 
he quitted these Provinces, which were imme- 
diately again taken possession of by the India 
Company. But Corah and Allahabad were so 
remote from the other possessions of the India 



192 

Company, that they could not be defended, ex- 
cept at an expense exceeding the revenue which 
could be drawn from them. And as the derang- 
ed state of the Company's finances, both at home 
and in India, did not make it advisable for them 
to incur this additional expense, the Directors 
wished to dispose of these Provinces to Sujah 
Dowlah, the only Monarch who was capable of 
defending them against the Mahrattas. 

When Mr. Hastings met Sujah Dowlah in 
1773, he succeeded with him in both these ob* 
jects. He prevailed on him to make a larger pay- 
ment for the use of the Company's troops ; and 
he obtained the sum of 500,000/. for the sale of 
the above named Provinces. Sujah Dowlah 
then brought forward the object which he wished 
to obtain from the India Company. He stated, 
that in 1772, the Rohillas had applied to him for 
assistance against the Mahrattas, who had invaded 
their territory ; that he had been extremely un- 
willing to afford them this assistance ; that he had 
at last been prevailed on by Sir Robert Barker, 
the Commander of the Company's troops in the 
upper Provinces, to enter into a Treaty with them ; 
that by this Treaty, he had engaged to assist the 
Rohillas to drive out the Mahrattas ; and that in 
consideration of this assistance, they had stipula- 
ted to pay him 400,000/. That he had success- 
fully assisted them ; — that he had driven out the 
Mahrattas ; — and that the Rohillas refused to pay 
him the stipulated sum. As he had afforded this 



193 

assistance to the Rohillas solely through the per- 
suasion of Sir Robert Barker, and at his earnest 
solicitation, and from a reliance that his authority 
would secure to him the stipulated payment, he 
thought himself entitled to call on the India Com- 
pany to assist him in punishing this gross breach 
of faith by the Rohillas. Mr. Hastings acquiesced 
in the justice of the demand. After these points 
of the treaty had been arranged, Mr. Hastings 
and Sujah Dowlah remained some days longer at 
Benares. Before they separated, S;jah Dowlah 
came to him and made the following statement : 
i6 1 have yielded to your two objects, and you 
have yielded to mine. But on more mature re- 
flection, as I am immediately to pay to the India 
Company, 500,000/. for the Provinces of Corah 
and Allahabad, and have also agreed to increase 
my payment for the use of their troops, I find that 
my treasure will be so much exhausted that I 
shall not be immediately able to adopt any mea- 
sures against the Rohillas. I must therefore defer, 
for the present, my intended designs against them. 
But if future circumstances should make it neces- 
sary for me to commence hostile proceedings 
against the Rohillas, I trust that you will recollect, 
that I have yielded to your two objects, and that 
you, in consideration of this, have agreed to afford 
me the assistance of the India Company for the 
execution of this measure : and that whenever I 
call for your assistance, no time shall be wasted in 

n 2 



194 

discussing the propriety of my demand; but that 
your troops shall immediately obey my call." 

Mr Hastings acquiesced in the fairness of this 
reasoning, and pledged himself that the Compa- 
ny's troops should march to his assistance against 
the Rohillas whenever they were called on. 

Whether the Rohillas received any intimation 
of this discussion between Mr. Hastings and Su- 
jah Dowlah, or whether their conduct was the 
result of a consciousness of their own breach of 
faith, I cannot say. But in the autumn of that 
same year, Sujah Dowlah received information 
that the Rohillas were negociating a treaty with 
the Mahrattas for the invasion of his dominions. 
He then saw that hostilities against the Rohillas 
could no longer be deferred. He stated to Mr. 
Hastings the intelligence which he had received, 
and demanded the assistance of the Company's 
troops. Mr. Hastings, with the approbation of 
his Council, ordered the troops to place them- 
selves under the direction of Sujah Dowlah. The 
War was commenced in the spring, 1774. The 
Rohillas were subdued ; and at the close of the 
Campaign, a treaty was concluded between them 
and Sujah Dowlah, called the Treaty of 'Lo/dong, 
by which it was agreed, that one of the Rohilla 
Chiefs should retain a certain portion of the coun- 
try, and remove to it with five thousand of his 
troops. The rest of the Rohilla Army were to 
cross the Ganges, and place themselves under 
another Rohilla chief of the name of Zabeda Caivn. 



195 

On the discussion of this charge, Sir Robert Bar- 
ker was examined at the bar of the House of 
Commons. It appeared from his evidence that 
he had signed that treaty by which Sujah Dowlah 
engaged to assist the Rohillas against the Mah- 
rattas. When asked why he had signed that 
treaty, he answered, " That if he had not signed 
it, there would have been no treaty ; for that nei- 
ther of the parties had any confidence in the good 
faith of the other ; and that each of the parties had 
acceded to the Treaty relying on the security af- 
forded by his signature: That he had urged 
Sujah Dowlah to this treaty because he thought 
that if the Mahrattas had possessed themselves of 
the Rohilla Country, the India Company's terri- 
tory would have been endangered." When ask- 
ed whether he thought the Rohillas ever intended 
to pay the money, he replied, " that he was fully 
persuaded that they never would pay it, except 
compelled by force." 

It did not appear from the evidence before the 
House of Commons, whether the evacuation of 
the country by the Rohilla Army, was an article 
which had been insisted on by Sujah Dowlah, 
or had been granted at the request of the Rohilla 
Chiefs. 

This question of the Rohilla War was debated 
for two nights in the House of Commons ; and on 
the last debate the House did not divide till after 
eight o'clock in the morning. Mr. Pitt took no 
part in the debate, though, I believe, he voted for 



196 

Mr. Hastings. No treasury letters had been sent 
out, as is usual when the Minister has formed his 
opinion on any subject. The charge had been 
drawn up by Mr. Burke with great art. The 
debate was also conducted with much unfairness : 
for instead of the question proposed to the House, 
being, that the House should adopt the Charge, 
the question was put in these terms — That in 
case the House should ultimately determine to 
impeach Mr. Hastings, the Rohilla charge should 
form part of the Impeachment. By this dexterity 
in putting the question on which the House was 
to divide, many members were brought to vote in 
the affirmative, who could not otherwise have 
been persuaded to do it. They voted for the 
question from a belief, that at the close of the 
discussion of the various Charges, no impeach- 
ment would be preferred. But all this dexterity 
failed of success. When it appeared that the two 
millions of inhabitants remained in the country, 
and that that which Mr. Burke had stated to be 
" the Extirpation of a whole Nation," amounted 
to nothing more than the evacuation of the Coun- 
try by an army of 26,000 men, the House was 
disgusted with the exaggeration which had been 
practised; and notwithstanding every exertion of 
the Foxite party, the question was negatived by 
a majority of fifty-three votes. 

It may not be foreign to this subject to remark, 
that the Rohillas inhabit the same tract of moun- 
tainous country with the Afghans; but that they 
are considered as the inferior tribe. 



197 

Arrian, in his account of India, speaks of two 
tribes who inhabited the same mountainous coun- 
try; and says that " one of these tribes was inferior 
hi rank to the other." It is curious that the same 
difference of rank which existed in the remote 
period mentioned by Arrian, should be found to 
prevail in our time. Arrian wrote in the reign of 
the Roman Emperor, Adrian. And though he 
wrote at a period when the Greek language may 
be considered to have been on the decline, yet 
his style has been thought so pure and elegant, 
that it has obtained him the name of the younger 
Xenophon. 

He compiled his account of India from the pa- 
pers of Megasthenes, physician to Seleneus, one 
of Alexander's immediate successors. Alexander 
never penetrated farther into India than the Pen- 
jab. He sailed down one of the five rivers of 
that country into the Indus, and from thence re- 
turned to Babylon. Seleneus certainly reached 
the Ganges. He resided for some time at a city 
which the Greek historian calls Palibothra. There 
is very little doubt but that this city is the same 
which the Moderns call Patna, as it is still in the 
language of the country called Palipoutre. Every 
man acquainted with India, must find much plea- 
sure in reading this work of Arrian, for he will 
see that India, in those remote times, was nearly 
the same in point of usages, manners, dress, 
amusements, division of casts, &c. &c. as it is at 
present. 



198 

I will now speak of the Benares Charge. The 
Rajah Bulwant-sing held the province of Benares, 
as a Renter, or Zemindar, from Sujah Dowlah, 
the Nabob of Oude. On the termination of the 
India Company's War with Sujah Dowlah, Bul- 
want-sing thought it for his interest to court the 
protection of the India Company. And as the 
province of Benares was situated between their 
territories and the dominions of Oude, the India 
Company thought it for their interest to afford to 
Bulwant-sing that protection which he solicited. 
They did not withdraw him from his subjection 
to Sujah Dowlah, but they compelled Sujah 
Dowlah to agree, that while Bulwant-sing paid 
him annually the sum of 220,000/. he should 
never call on him for any other payments or ser- 
vices ; Sujah Dowlah died in 1775. The Go- 
vernment of Bengal was at that time in the hands 
of Mr. Hastings, General Clavering, General 
Monson, Mr. Barvvell, and Mr. Francis ; or, to 
speak more correctly, it was in the hands of Ge- 
neral Clavering, General Monson, and Mr. Fran- 
cis. For those three gentlemen had, by confede- 
rating together, reduced Mr. Hastings and Mr. 
Barwell to be of little importance. The three 
gentlemen above mentioned proposed that Azoph 
Ul Dowlah, the son and successor of Sujah Dow- 
lah, should be compelled to resign the sovereign- 
ty of Benares with the attendant rent, to the India 
Company. Mr. Hastings strongly objected to 
this proposal. He thought that it was for the 



199 

interest of the Company to set bounds to its de- 
sires of aggrandizement. He gave it as his opi- 
nion, that the India Company would draw more 
revenue from the possession of Bengal and Bahar, 
than it would do if it extended its empire beyond 
those limits. But the opinion of Mr. Hastings 
was over-ruled ; and the sovereignty of Benares 
was transferred by Azoph Ul Dovvlah to the India 
Company. It is scarcely worth while to consi- 
der, whether the opinion, at that time given by 
Mr. Hastings, was founded in sound policy or 
not. It was not only over-ruled at that time by 
his colleagues, but an opinion directly contrary to 
that of Mr. Hastings seems now to be entertained 
by the India Company ; perhaps, by the majority 
of the British nation : for the present opinion 
seems to be, that you must possess the whole of 
India ; and that except you possess the whole, 
you cannot be secure in the possession of any 
part. I will only express my wish, Quod Felix 
sitfaustumque. In 1779, Hyder Ali invaded the 
Carnatic. At that time, by the deaths of General 
Clavering and General Monson, Mr. Hastings 
had regained his ascendancy in the Bengal Go- 
vernment. In the minutes of the deliberations of 
the Council on that invasion, it appears that Mr. 
Francis delivered as his opinion, " that neither 
soldier nor rupee should be sent to the Carnatic ; 
for that that country was irrecoverably lost : and 
that every soldier, and every rupee, sent there, 
would be uselessly expended." Mr. Hastings's 



200 

opinion was directly the reverse of that of Mr. 
Francis. His minute is in these terms : " While 
I have a soldier, or a rupee, I will never abandon 
the Carnatic ; for if we do not fight Hyder Ali in 
that country, we shall have to fight him here.'' 
In pursuance of this opinion, Mr. Hastings put 
the whole force of the Bengal empire in activity* 
At the moment that the army which he had col- 
lected was about to set out for the Carnatic, 
Chemnajee, the son of the Rajah of Berar, appear- 
ed on the frontiers of Bengal, demanding the chout, 
or tribute, paid in antient times to the Mahrattas. 
Chemnajee had with him about fifty thousand ill- 
disciplined followers. They could not have stood 
before the army collected by Mr. Hastings, but 
they could have delayed the march of that army, 
the presence of which was so necessary in the 
Carnatic. To prevent this delay, Mr. Hastings 
entered into a treaty with Chemnajee. He agreed 
to pay him 210,000/. ; in consideration of which 
payment, Chemnajee engaged not only to relin- 
quish all hostilities against the province of Bengal, 
but also to grant to the British Army an unmo- 
lested passage through the dominions of the Rajah 
of Berar, and to supply the Army with provi- 
sions during its march. This Treaty was faith- 
fully observed on both sides, and the British Army 
arrived in the Carnatic without the smallest loss. 
I have mentioned this transaction, because it was 
the subject of the second Charge exhibited by 
Mr. Burke, against Mr. Hastings. Mr. Francis 



201 

had resisted every proposal of Mr. Hastings for 
sending relief to the Carnatic. Among others, 
he had resisted this treaty with Chemnajee, and 
had prevailed on Mr, Burke to introduce the sub- 
ject as one of his Charges; but it was abandoned. 
Mr. Fox told me, that he did not think it contain- 
ed ground for impeachment. Were I to presume 
to give my opinion on this subject, I should say, 
that instead of reprehension, Mr. Hastings de- 
served applause. That his conduct exhibited a 
master-mind capable of firm decision on a ques- 
tion of great emergency. I have said, that to en- 
able himself to send relief to the Carnatic, Mr. 
Hastings put every part of the Bengal empire in 
motion. He called for men and money from 
every quarter. He did not consider the Rajah of 
Benares as entitled to exemption from this de- 
mand ; and he required from Cheyt-sing, who had 
succeeded his father, Bulwant-sing, in that Ze- 
mindary, the assistance of two regiments of ca- 
valry. 

Mr. Francis was at that time at the head of the 
opposition to Mr. Hastings in the Bengal council; 
and as he had resisted every effort for sending re- 
lief to the Carnatic, he objected to this demand of 
two regiments from Cheyt-sing. This opposition 
of Mr. Francis encouraged Cheyt-sing in disobe- 
dience, and the repeated demand of Mr. Hastings 
for assistance, was either wholly evaded, or only 
in part complied with. Mr. Hastings determine*} 
to punish Cheyt-sing for this conduct. He re- 



202 

paired to Benares; he summoned Cheyt-sing be- 
fore him ; he reprimanded him for his conduct, 
and then ordered him to consider himself as un- 
der arrest. Mr. Hastings then commanded an 
Officer with about two hundred and eighty Se- 
poys, to escort Cheyt-sing to his own palace, and 
to guard him there as under arrest. The officer, 
who commanded this escort, was guilty of a ne- 
glect which produced disastrous consequences. 
He marched off the escort without providing them 
with powder and ball. When the dependants of 
Cheyt-sing had discovered this circumstance, 
they thought themselves strong enough to break 
into the palace, and set the Rajah at liberty. The 
Sepoys, with their bayonets, if they had acted 
with firmness, would have been able to repel the 
attack; but conscious that they were not provided 
with their usual means of defence, they were seiz- 
ed with a panic, they fled, and Cheyt-sing was set 
at liberty. I believe that the generous character 
of Mr. Hastings prevented this neglect of the 
Commander of the escort from being generally 
known; he felt reluctance at an attempt to excuse 
himself by throwing blame on another. When 
the Benares Charge was argued in the House of 
Commons, Mr. Fox rested his argument solely 
on this principle, that Cheyt-sing was an indepen- 
dent Prince, no way liable to be called on for suc- 
cour by the Bengal government. Mr. Pitt re- 
sisted this opinion of Mr. Fox ; on the contrary, 
tie said, " Cheyt-sing was a vassal of the Bengal 



£03 

empire, and as he received protection from that 
empire, he owed to it allegiance ; and in conse- 
quence of that duty of allegiance, was liable to be 
called on for extraordinary aids on extraordinary 
emergencies/*' He also assented to an assertion, 
which had been advanced in the course of the 
debate, viz. " That Mr. Hastings having only put 
Cheyt-sing under arrest for the purpose of sub- 
jecting his conduct to examination, could not be 
criminated for having inflicted too harsh a punish- 
ment on him. 9 * But he said, " that the whole of 
Mr. Hastings's conduct showed that he intended 
to punish Cheyt-sing with too much severity; this 
intention was criminal, and for this criminal in- 
tention, he should, though with much reluctance! 
vote for the impeachment of Mr. Hastings."* 
Thus was this impeachment voted by a majority 
of the House, although those who voted were 
not agreed as to the ground of criminality. 

A few mornings after the vote, I was with 
Lord Thurlow. He strongly reprobated Mr. 
Pitt's conduct ; especially his grounding the Im- 
peachment on Mr. Hastings's intention to commit 
a crime. Among other expressions, I recollect 
he said, " If a girl had talked law in those terms, 
she might have been excusable.'" No other 
Charges against Mr. Hastings were discussed in 
the House of Commons that session. The exa- 
mination of the remaining nineteen Charges was 
deferred till the ensuing Session. I had taken 
part in the debates on the Rohilla and Benares 



204 

Charges; but as I saw at the commencement ot 
the next Session, that Mr. Pitt had decided that 
the Impeachment against Mr. Hastings should be 
voted, I gave myself no further trouble on the 
subject. There were people who thought that 
Mr. Pitt had adopted this line of conduct to pre- 
vent the King from employing Mr. Hastings 
in India affairs. But I do not believe that Mr. 
Pitt was actuated by so personal and so paltry a 
motive. I think he consented to the Impeach- 
ment, because he saw the controul which he 
should obtain over the Opposition by such ac- 
quiescence ; and his expectations were answered. 
I will now say a few words on the nature of an 
Impeachment: — an Impeachment is an accusa- 
tion preferred by the Commons to be tried by the 
Peers. It is not ex debito justitia ; it is an extra- 
ordinary mode of proceeding. It is not to be con- 
sidered as analogous to an Indictment, for an In- 
dictment is an accusation for one definite offence; 
whereas the Impeachment may be preferred for 
many offences considered together. Correctly 
speaking, Impeachment is to be resorted to where 
an Indictment could not reach the whole of the 
criminality. It is an accusation preferred against 
a public Minister: and the question which every 
Member of the House of Commons ought to 
consider before he gives his vote, is this: — " On 
the whole of this public servant's conduct consi- 
dered together, is it expedient that he should be 
criminated V 9 On the charges against Mr. Hast- 



205 

ings, I regulated my conduct by this mode of 
reasoning ; I remembered that wise maxim of the 
common law, Actio non est rea nisi mens sit rea. 
I asked myself whether I could find the mens rea 
in Mr. Hastings's conduct on either of the three 
Charges I have above enumerated ; suppose for 
instance, that he had mistaken the law of nations, 
in thinking that Sir Robert Barker had pledged 
the guarantee of the India Company, by signing 
the Treaty between Sujah Dowlah and the Ro- 
hillas; and that he had also been mistaken in the 
opinion which he had formed, that in consequence 
of this guarantee, the India Company was bound 
to give assistance to Sujah Dowlah against the 
Rohillas. Had Mr. Hastings derived any advan- 
tage to himself from these mistakes? And if he 
had derived no advantage to himself, how could 
I fix on him the mens rea? He had given a sum 
of money to Chemnajee to induce him to relin- 
quish his design of invading Bengal, and to afford 
assistance to the Army which was passing from 
Bengal into the Carnatic. What personal advan- 
tage accrued to Mr. Hastingr from this Treaty ? 
He furthered his design of sending assistance as 
expeditiously as possible to the Carnatic, and 
manifestly this was his only object. In respect 
to the ground on which Mr. Pitt had concurred 
in the Benares Charge, viz. " That Mr. Hastings 
had intended to punish Cheyt-sing too severely, 9 ' 
the human mind could hardly imagine any thinp- 
weaker. Mr. Hastings had never punished him. 

s 2 



206 

He had only put him under an arrest with a view 
to the examination of his conduct, and for subse- 
quent punishment, if he should be found to have 
deserved it. The liberation of Cheyt Sing by his 
dependants precluded all further examination. 
But neither on the ground taken by Mr. Fox, viz. 
H that he had demanded aid from Cheyt Sing 
where none was due," nor on that taken by Mr. 
Pitt, " that he had intended to punish Cheyt Sing 
too severely," could I see any thing like a cri- 
minal mind. If on all these points he had acted 
erroneously, he had acted from mistake, and not 
from that criminal mind, which alone is punisha- 
ble. 

In forming my opinion on the impeachment of 
Mr. Hastings, I took various points into consi- 
deration. The British nation had confided the 
management of its Indian Empire to the India 
Company. The India Company regulated its 
Indian concerns through the agency of a Gover- 
nor General and Council. The Governor Gene- 
ral was the efficient person in that Council. If 
in any instance Mr. Hastings had acted under the 
influence of corrupt passions, he was punishable 
by impeachment. But if on any occasion he had 
only acted from a mistaken judgment, I thought 
he ought not to be punished by the impeachment 
of the House of Commons. On the Rohilla 
Charge I thought, that Mr. Hastings had acted 
consonantly to the law of nations. That Sir Ro- 
bert Barker's signature of the treaty between 



207 

Sujah Dowlah and the Rohillahs amounted to a 
guarantee ; and that it authorised Sujah Dowlah 
to call on the India Company to assist him in ob- 
taining the stipulated payment. Here then Mr. 
Hastings was guilty of no mistake, and the House 
of Commons concurred in this opinion. The 
treaty with Chemnajee was said to be disgraceful 
to the English name. But the advantages gained 
by it were so great, that I could never bring my- 
self to disapprove of it. On the Benares Charge 
my opinion still remains the same. Protection 
and allegiance are reciprocal duties. Wherever 
protection is received, allegiance is due. Cheyt 
Sing could not have existed for a single hour if 
unprotected by the British Government. He 
would have been devoured by the Nabob of 
Oude. He was like a pigeon under the eye of a 
hawk, who would have pounced on him if unre- 
strained by a superior power. I therefore could 
not consider Mr. Hastings as having formed an 
erroneous opinion, when he said, H Cheyt Sing 
was the vassal of the India Company, and owes 
assistance when the Company has occasion for 
extraordinary aids." I also recollected the very 
peculiar difficulties which Mr. Hastings was un- 
der when he was called on to form an opinion on 
great political questions. The nature of the British 
Empire in India was hardly developed. We had 
scarcely formed an accurate opinion on it our- 
selves. The policy of the Mogul Government 
had established two distinct departments in each 



208 

province. In the military department the Nabob 
was supreme: in the civil department the Dewan. 
The English India Company founded its authori- 
ty in Bengal and Bahar on a real or supposed 
grant of the Dewanee of those provinces from the 
Great Mogul. They continued, however, to ex- 
hibit to the natives a splendid pageant, which they 
called a Nabob, and all discussions with foreign 
Princes were under the name of this Nabob. Mr. 
Hastings must certainly have felt much embarrass- 
ment from the undefined power of his masters. 

I thought also, that it was reasonable to take 
into consideration his situation in India. In Eng- 
land, if the minister is called on to decide on a 
great political question, he has many men at hand 
who can assist him with their advice. He has 
lawyers in every branch of that study. He has 
men, who have travelled in all parts of the world, 
and who know the relation which the concerns of 
other countries bear to British interests. When 
Mr. Hastings was called on to decide, he had no 
such assistance near him. I therefore can only 
wonder that he did not make more mistakes. 
The three charges which I have taken notice of 
were the three subjects on which Mr. Francis 
had opposed the government of Mr. Hastings in 
Bengal. He had prevailed on Mr. Burke to adopt 
his opinions on these points; and Mr. Burke's 
influence over Mr. Fox had induced that gentle- 
man to bring down the Opposition in full force to 
support these charges. In truth, the charges ex- 



209 

nibited by Mr. Burke in the House of Commons 
were nothing more than a continuation of that op- 
position, which Mr. Francis, while in India, had 
made to the measures of Mr. Hastings's govern- 
ment. I was unacquainted with Mr. Hastings, 
when these charges were laid on the table. When 
I examined them, I was disgusted with the unfair 
manner in which they were framed. This led 
me to take part in the debates ; and after the ses- 
ision was ended, I became acquainted with Mr, 
Hastings. lie appeared to me to be a man of a 
strong, vigorous, decisive mind ; well acquainted 
with the character of the natives of India, and 
with the views and interests of its various Prin- 
ces. He seemed to me to be a man capable of 
extricating himself from difficulties by his great 
resources and dauntless courage. In one word, 
he came nearer to the idea which I had formed of 
an able statesman, than any other man with whom 
I ever had intercourse. But he was a statesman 
only for the affairs of India. He knew nothing of 
the various parties in England, their interests, 
their designs, their ability to effectuate those de- 
signs, or how far they were likely to be influenced 
or restrained by moral considerations. These 
were subjects on which he seemed to me never to 
have formed any opinion. I have said, that Mr. 
Hastings was capable of extricating himself from 
difficulties by his great resources and his daunt- 
less courage. He displayed these qualities in a 
most remarkable manner, while surrounded by 



210 

the forces of Cheyt Sing at Benares. Mr. Hast 
logs had with him only four hundred soldiers, 
Cheyt Sing had forty thousand. If Cheyt Sing 
had attacked him, Mr. Hastings's situation must 
have been forced before he could have collected 
assistance. But instead of an immediate attack, 
the Rajah sent in a proposal to treat with him. 
Mr. Hastings knew, that if he opened a treaty, 
the Indian Prince's courage wouldibe increased, and 
that he would, most probably, immediately attack 
him. That, on the contrary, if he refused to treat, 
Cheyt Sing would suppose, that Mr. Hastings 
had some resources with which he was unac- 
quainted. He therefore sent for answer to his pro- 
posal, that before he would listen to any excuse 
for his conduct, Cheyt Sing must come into Be- 
nares, and throw himself at his feet. This an- 
swer intimidated Cheyt Sing, and allowed time 
for troops to come to the relief of Mr. Hastings. 

I have thus given my opinion on the three first 
charges exhibited by Mr. Burke against Mr- 
Hastings. I have entered into the consideration 
of them with much reluctance. I had taken part 
in the debates on the first and third charges ; and 
from that circumstance may be thought to have 
my opinion prejudiced in favour of Mr. Hastings. 
I was unacquainted with that gentleman when the 
discussion was first entered on in the House of 
Commons. But, after the close of that session, 
I was introduced to him, and gradually admitted 
to the most intimate and confidential communica- 



211 

tions. I acknowledge, that I think of his me- 
mory with the highest veneration. I think, that 
he was a man of the most powerful mind I have 
ever conversed with. 

I have said, that the charges, brought forward 
by Mr. Burke against Mr. Hastings, were on 
those subjects, which had been matter of discus- 
sion between Mr. Francis and Mr. Hastings, 
while the former gentleman was in India ; that the 
impeachment of Mr. Hastings was a continuation 
of Mr. Francis's opposition to Mr. Hastings's 
Government. I believe I am correct in this as- 
sertion. All the materials for the twenty-two 
charges, brought forward by Mr. Burke, were 
furnished by Mr. Francis. And Mr. Burke had 
sufficient influence to prevail on Mr. Fox to sup- 
port the charges with the whole strength of Op- 
position. Mr. Francis was a man of considera- 
ble abilities. He was a very superior classical 
scholar ; and he was capable of laborious applica- 
tion. Strong resentment was a leading feature in 
his character. I have heard him avow this sen- 
timent more openly and more explicitly than I 
ever heard any other man avow it in the whole 
course of my life. I have heard him publicly 
say in the House of Commons, " Sir Elijah Impey 
is not fit to sit in judgment on any matter where 
I am interested, nor am I fit to sit in judgment 
on him," A relation of the ground of this ill 
will may be amusing. Mrs. Le Grand, the wife 
of a gentleman in the Civil Service in Bengal, 



212 

vi as admired for her beauty, for the sweetness of 
her temper, and for her fascinating accomplish- 
ments. She attracted the attention of Mr. Fran- 
cis. This gentleman, by means of a rope-ladder, 
got into her apartment in the night. After he had 
remained there about three quarters of an hour, 
there was an alarm ; and Mr. Francis came down 
from the lady's apartment by the rope-ladder, at 
the foot of which he was seized by Mr. Le 
Grand's servants. An action was brought by 
Mr. Le Grand against Mr. Francis, in the Su- 
preme Court of Justice in Calcutta. The judges 
in that court assess the damages in civil actions, 
without the intervention of a jury. The gentle- 
men who at that time filled this situation, were 
Sir Elijah Impey, Chief Justice, Sir Robert Cham- 
bers, and Mr. Justice Hyde. I was intimate with 
the first and the third from early life ; having liv- 
ed with them on the Western Circuit. On the 
trial of this cause, Sir Robert Chambers thought, 
that as no criminality had been proved, no da- 
mages should be given. But he afterwards pro- 
posed to give thirty thousand rupees, which are 
worth about three thousand pounds sterling. 
Mr. Justice Hyde was for giving a hundred thou- 
sand rupees. I believe, that Mr. Justice Hyde 
was as upright a judge as ever sat on any bench ; 
but he had an implacable hatred to those, who in- 
dulged in the crime imputed to Mr. Francis. 
Sir Elijah Impey was of opinion, that although 
no criminal intercourse had been proved, yet that 



215 

the wrong done by Mr. Francis to Mr. Le Grand 
in entering his wife's apartment in the night, and 
thereby destroying her reputation, ought to be 
compensated with liberal damages. He thought 
the sum of thirty thousand rupees, proposed by 
Sir Robert Chambers, too small ; and that pro- 
posed by Mr. Hyde, of a hundred thousand, too 
large. He therefore suggested a middle course, 
of fifty thousand rupees. This proposal was ac- 
quiesced in by his two colleagues. When Sir 
Elijah Impey was delivering the judgment of 
the Court, my late friend, Mr. Justice Hyde, 
could not conceal his eager zeal on the subject ; 
and when Sir Elijah named the sum of fifty thou- 
sand rupees, Mr. Justice Hyde, to the amusement 
of the bystanders, called out, " Siccas, brother 
Impey f* which are worth eleven per cent, more 
than the current rupees. Perhaps this story may 
not be thought worthy of relation : but it gave 
occasion to that animosity, which Mr. Francis 
publicly avowed against Sir Elijah Impey ; and 
the criminal charge, afterwards brought against 
him in the House of Commons, was the offspring 
of that animosity. I will follow up this anecdote 
by mentioning the consequences of the action 
brought by Mr. Le Grand. The lady was di- 
vorced : she was obliged to throw herself under 
the protection of Mr. Francis for subsistence. 
After a short time she left him, and went to Eng- 
land. In London she fell into the company of 
M. Talleyrand Perigord. Captivated by her 



214 

charms, he prevailed on her to accompany him to 
Paris, where he married her ; and thus the insult, 
which this lady received from Mr. Francis, and 
the loss of reputation, which was, perhaps unjust- 
ly, the consequence of that insult, eventually ele- 
vated her to the rank of Princess of Benevento. 

As I took part in the defence of Mr. Hastings 
on the two charges which I have mentioned, and 
was known to interest myself much in the welfare 
of Sir Elijah Impey, I speak with some reluc- 
tance of Mr. Francis ; but the impeachment of 
Mr. Hastings, and the accusation of Sir Elijah 
Impey, both originated with him. 

The first charge brought forward the ensuing 
session, excited so much of the public attention, 
that although I took no part in the debate while 
it was depending in the House of Commons, yet 
it may perhaps, not be improper to state the sub- 
ject. It was called the Begum Charge. It grew 
out of a political discussion between Mr. Francis 
and Mr. Hastings, while those gentlemen were in 
India. This charge rested on the following cir- 
cumstances. Sujah Dowlah, the Nabob of Oude, 
died in 1775. He left a widow, named the Bhow 
Begum ; and by her one only son, Azoph Ul 
Dowlah, who succeeded him in the sovereignty 
of Oude. I believe the Mahometan law allows a 
man to have four wives ; but Sujah Dowlah had 
never availed himself of this permission. The 
Bhow Begum was the only woman whom he had 
ever married. For some years he had lived with 



215 

her on indifferent terms. But when he was in a 
state of distress, in consequence of his hostilities 
with the English Government, his wife collected 
all her treasure, and all the force which she could 
draw together, and joined him in his hour of need: 
determined to share with him his good or ill suc- 
cess. This conduct regained her the affections 
of Sujah Dowlah. From that hour she was the 
person on whose attachment he placed the most 
entire confidence. Those, who are not acquaint- 
ed with the manners of an Asiatic Court, can 
with difficulty form an idea of the power of a wo- 
man locked up in a zenana, and precluded from 
personal intercourse with men, except such as 
stand related to her in the character of husband 
or children. But the nower of the Bhow Bemjm 
in her husband's court seems to have exceeded 
that which is commonly allowed to the wives of 
Sovereigns in Europe. She was his treasurer : 
no payment was made except authorized by her 
signature. At his death all his treasure was in 
her apartments, and in her possession. Her only 
son, Azoph Ul Dowlah, admitted his mother's 
right to retain a portion of this treasure ; but con- 
tended, that, by the Mahometan law, the greater 
part of it belonged to himself, as his father's suc- 
cessor in the Sovereignty of Oude. He also 
urged, that very heavy arrears were due to his 
father's army, and that if he were deprived of this 
treasure he should be unable to satisfy their de- 
mands. The mother declared, that she would 



216 

keep the whole. I do not pretend to know enough 
of the Mahometan law to be able to form an opi- 
nion on this question between the mother and her 
son. The Bengal government, at that time ex- 
ercised by General Clavering, General Monson, 
and Mr. Francis, espoused the cause of the Bhow 
Begum, in opposition to the opinion of Mr. Hast- 
ings. They allowed the lady to retain three parts 
in four of the treasure : by which decision the 
money received by Azoph Ul Dowlah amounted 
only to about eight hundred thousand pounds. It 
was generally believed, that the treasure left by 
Sujah Dowlah much exceeded the sum admitted 
by the Bhow Begum to be in her possession ; and 
it was so very difficult to prove all the remittances 
of money, which had been made to the treasury, 
that the amount of the treasure left by Sujah Dow- 
lah was necessarily estimated almost wholly by 
the admission of the lady herself. The Bengal 
Government guaranteed to the Bhow Begum, 
not only the possession of this treasure, but also 
of a large Jaghire> with the exercise of almost so- 
vereign power within that district. This decision 
of the Bengal Government compelled Azoph UI 
Dowlah to begin the exercise of sovereignty under 
great difficulties. The discharge of the debts left 
unpaid by his father was claimed from him ; and 
that treasure, with which they ought to have been 
paid, was with-held from him. Mr. Hastings 
considered the' Nabob of Oude as a dependant on 
the Bengal Government ; and when the war with 



21? 

France begun in 1778, and the invasion of the 
Carnatic by Hyder Ali in the following year made 
it necessary for him to call forth all the resources 
of the Bengal Empire, he called for supplies of 
men and money from Azoph Ul Dowlah. That 
Prince furnished them cheerfully, and to a great 
amount; but in the beginning of the year 1782 
there was no money in this prince's treasury ; and 
he was unable to make his payments to the Ben- 
gal Government ; yet the money was absolutely 
necessary to enable that Government to continue 
its exertions against France and Hyder Ali. In 
this embarrassment, the ministers of Azoph Ul 
Dowlah suggested the propriety of cancelling 
that division of Sujah Dowlah' s treasure between 
the Bhow Begum and her son, which, as they 
said, had been unjustly made under the authority 
of the Bengal Government. Mr. Hastings resist- 
ed this proposal : but he thought it equitable, 
that the mother should come to the assistance of 
her son ; and he therefore consented, that the mi- 
nisters of Azoph Ul Dowlah should employ such 
means as they thought expedient to prevail on her 
to afford him pecuniary assistance, provided that 
they most carefully abstained from offering any 
mark of disrespect to her person, or any violation 
of the privileges belonging to her place of resi- 
dence. When Azoph Ul Dowlah's ministers 
had obtained this permission, they watched the 
first opportunity of finding the Bhow Begum's 
two principal ministers, Johar Alt tiavm, and 

T 2 



218 

Behar All Caw?i y out of the privileged limits of 
her residence, and seized their persons. These 
two eunuchs directed all the concerns of the Be- 
gum. They were privy to the amount of her 
wealth, and to all her other secrets ; and were be- 
lieved to be the persons, who had principally ad- 
vised her to refuse assistance to her son. It was 
the design of Azoph Ul Dowlah's ministers to in- 
timidate the eunuchs to such a degree, as to in- 
duce them to recommend to their mistress to ad- 
vance money to her son. The design succeeded, 
and the Begum assisted her son with five hundred 
thousand pounds. 

On this charge Mr. Sheridan made a speech 
which both sides of the House professed greatly 
to admire : for Mr. Pitt now openly approved of 
the impeachment. I will acknowledge, that I did 
not admire this speech of Mr. Sheridan. The 
House was called on to concur with Mr. Burke 
in accusing Mr. Hastings. Accusatorial func- 
tions approach very nearly to judicial functions ; 
and in my opinion ought to be exercised with the 
same caution, and with equal observance of integ- 
rity. Mr. Sheridan's speech was not calculated 
to inform, but to mislead his hearers. The 
charge was adopted. The remaining charges oc- 
casioned little discussion. The impeachment of 
Mr. Hastings was voted, and carried up to the 
House of Lords. 

I have thus stated the four political charges 
brought by Mr. Burke against Mr. Hastings. 



219 

The remaining charges were of much less impor- 
tance ; they related chiefly to objections to Mr, 
Hastings's conduct in the details of his govern- 
ment. Although I took no part in the debate on 
the Begum Charge, I voted against it. Mr. 
Hastings had derived no advantage to himself 
from the permission which he had thus granted 
to the ministers of Azoph Ul Dowlah. He stood 
the minister of the British Nation, exercising 
powers scarcely defined by that Nation which 
had confided them to him. He was to exercise 
these powers without being assisted with the ad- 
vice of others. I looked only to the integrity of 
his conduct: I could not bring myself to punish 
him for mistakes, even if I had thought that mis- 
takes had been committed. But, in this Begum 
Charge, 1 did not think that Mr. Hastings had 
made any mistake. I thought it was equitable, 
that the unjust division of Sujah Dowlah's trea- 
sure, which had been made in 1775, should be 
set aside. 

In thus resisting the impeachment of Mr. Has- 
tings, I am not conscious that I was influenced 
by any improper motive. I had never lived in 
such intercourse with Mr. Francis, but I had al- 
ways been impressed with the idea of his being 
a man of very considerable abilities. I acknow- 
ledge, that I had disapproved of his conduct 
while he stood, in the Bengal Government, the 
opponent of those measures, which were recom- 
mended by Mr. Hastings. The French and 



220 

Hyder Ali had attacked our possessions in India. 
Mr. Hastings thought, that every effort of the 
British empire in India should be employed to 
resist them. Mr. Francis was of a different opi- 
nion. He scrupulously examined every exertion 
that was proposed. He viewed it in all its bear- 
ings, and raised every objection, which his abi- 
lities and his well-informed mind enabled him to 
bring forward. My mind had been accustomed 
to meditate on the misfortunes brought on us by 
the American War. At the commencement of 
that war, in 1 775, the American Colonies formed 
the Western branch, and our possessions in In- 
dia the Eastern branch of our Empire. In the 
course of that war the American branch was 
torn from us. What must have been our situa- 
tion if we had experienced similar misfortunes in 
India? How should we have treated with France, 
Spain, Holland, and the United States of Ameri- 
ca, at the commencement of the year 1783, if the 
British empire in India had been conquered by 
our enemies ? It was preserved to us; and, as I 
think, its preservation was the result of the ener- 
gies of that able statesman, Warren Hastings. I 
had lived in habits of acquaintance with Mr. 
Edmund Burke. I had no prejudices against 
him ; for he had not at that time involved my 
country in the crusade against French principles. 
Before he brought forward the charges against 
Mr. Hastings, tie conversed with me very fully 
on the subject. I put this question to him : 



221 

" Can you prove, that Mr. Hastings ever derived 
any advantage to himself from that misconduct 
which you impute to him ?" He acknowledged 
" that he could not ;" but added, " that his 
whole government of India had been one conti- 
nued violation of the great principles of justice." 
Before the charges were laid on the table, I had 
a second conversation with Mr. Burke on the 
subject. When he found that I persevered in 
my opinion, he told me, u that in that case I 
must relinquish the friendship of the Duke of 
Portland." I replied, " that that would give me 
pain; but that I would rather relinquish the Duke 
of Portland's friendship than support an impeach- 
ment which I did not approve." We parted, and 
our intercourse was terminated. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

On Mr. Edmund Burke. 

I may perhaps be thought to have spoken 
in some places with too much severity of Mr. 
Edmund Burke. My acquaintance with this 
gentleman began about the year 1780. My in- 
tercourse with him impressed me with the high- 
est idea of his political erudition. I say nothing 



222 

of his abilities : my opinion of him on that head 
is the same as is generally entertained, viz. that 
he had great powers, with very little judgment. 
I never had any personal difference with him : at 
the commencement of our intercourse my admira- 
tion of him was great; it gradually diminished 
into disapprobation of his measures, and disap- 
probation gradually increased into disesteem. In 
the autumn, 1781, when it was visible that the 
nation was every day becoming more tired of the 
American War, and that Lord North would be 
obliged to relinquish it, I was very anxious to see 
union established between the friends of the Mar- 
quis of Rockingham and those of the Earl of 
Shelburne. The friends of the Earl of Shelburne 
professed to wish it, and I firmly believe that 
they were sincere. This union was prevented 
by Mr. Burke; the consequences of the continu- 
ance of disunion sufficiently appeared on the for- 
mation of the Cabinet of Eleven in the ensuing 
spring. During the three months that Lord 
Rockingham was minister, in 1782, I saw much 
in Mr. Burke's conduct which I disapproved ; 
on the death of that noble Marquis, the separa- 
tion between Mr. Fox and the Earl of Shelburne 
was effected solely by the efforts of Mr. Burke. 
Mr. Fox was a man of kindness : malice seemed 
to me not to enter into his composition ; and I 
am very certain that he had no ill will to the Earl 
of Shelburne, even down to the hour of the 
Marquis of Rockingham's death. 



223 

When the separation between the friends of 
the deceased Marquis and the Earl of Shelburne 
took place, there was a meeting of the Rocking- 
hams at Earl Fitzwilliam's, and at this meeting 
Mr. Burke spoke of the Earl of Shelburne in 
terms so coarse and unmeasured as to preclude 
all possibility of reconciliation. When the Rock- 
inghams and Shelburnes had separated, there ex- 
isted three political parties, viz. Lord North's, 
the late Lord Rockingham's, and the Earl of 
Shelburne's. It was obvious, that whichever 
two of these parties joined, they would be too 
powerful in the House of Commons for the third. 
It may therefore be supposed, that when Mr. 
Burke prevailed on the Rockinghams to separate 
from Lord Shelburne, he had in view a union 
between the Rockinghams and Lord North ; but 
I do not believe that he at that time had any such 
idea. The Duke of Richmond was very earnest, 
that the Earl of Shelburne should be prime mini- 
ster, and that he himself should be considered as 
the head of the Rockingham party. But this 
was extremely disagreeable to Mr. Burke. He 
knew, that he had no influence over the Duke of 
Richmond ; and it was Mr. Burke's wish that 
the Duke of Portland should be brought from 
Ireland, and proclaimed chief of the late Mar- 
quis's friends. He urged this arrangement, be- 
cause he knew that the Duke of Portland would 
be entirely under his guidance ; and he sacrificed 



2-24 

the political strength of his party to his own per- 
sonal wishes. 

William Eden was the mezzano, who effected 
the coalition between Lord North and Mr. Fox ; 
or, as the late Duke of Norfolk, while Earl of 
Surrey, expressed it in the House of Commons, 
" He was the priest who married us." During 
the nine months in 1783, that the Coalitionists 
were in possession of the administration, they 
were wholly under the guidance of Mr. Burke. 
His arrogance was sufficiently disgusting. He 
ultimately ruined them by his India Bill. It was 
much to be regretted, that when the Marquis of 
Rockingham came into office in 1765, his inex- 
perience in public business should have made it 
necessary that he should have about him a person 
who might act as his guide. I believe Mr. Burke 
was a very proper person for the situation. For 
his failings did not perhaps at that time exist. 
They grew up afterwards gradually, as their 
growth was encouraged by the occasion. While 
the Duke of Portland was first Lord of the Trea- 
sury, Mr. Burke's influence was more authorita- 
tive than it had been during the life of the Mar- 
quis of Rockingham. For Lord Rockingham, 
when he would venture to do it, was capable of 
thinking for himself. 

When Mr. Burke brought forward his accu- 
sation against Mr. Hastings, he solicited me to 
support him. In the course of our discussion, 



9M 

told me, that if I declined supporting him, I must 
relinquish the friendship of the Duke of Portland; 
and my connection with Mr. Burke, as well as 
with the Duke of Portland, was from that hour 
terminated. While Mr. Burke was the guide of 
the Marquis of Rockingham and of the Duke of 
Portland, he inculcated more openly than ever 
had been done before, " that every man ought 
to be enlisted in a party : that a member of the 
House of Commons ought not to consider the 
merit of the question immediately before the 
House : that he should only consider whether he 
wished the minister to remain in office, or that his 
rivals should take his place." He inculcated this 
doctrine both in his speeches and his pamphlets : 
it always appeared to me a doctrine highly un- 
constitutional ; but it served the views of Mr. 
Burke, as it recommended him to the leaders of 
his party ; for he accompanied the doctrine with 
this addition, " that as the ancestors of those lea- 
ders had placed the Brunswicks on the throne, 
they had a right to be the ministers, and to dic- 
tate the political measures which should be pur- 
sued." r 

But the great injury, which Mr. Burke did to 
his country, was by preaching the crusade against 
French principles. He was emphatically the 
Peter the Hermit, who preached up this holy war. 
I consider this as the great measure of his life, 
and if I have ever spoken of him with harshness, 
my language has been the result of my feelings 



v 



226 

on this subject. The French Revolution, at its 
very commencement, excited great alarm in the 
minds of princes and nobles, especially of Ger- 
man princes. It is well known that George III. 
did not conceal his opinion on this head. Mr- 
Burke expressed his disapprobation of the French 
Revolution at an early period : his language gra- 
dually became more violent : he professed to 
wish to excite all parties. Not only all parties, 
but every religious sect in the British Empire 
was called on to exert itself. He did not con- 
fine himself to the limits of Great Britain and 
Ireland ; he endeavoured to rouse every part of 
ihe Continent. His son was sent to a meeting 
of princes and ministers at Coblentz. The Em- 
peror Leopold and the King of Prussia were ex- 
cited by Mr. Burke's publications. In a word, 
he left no means unemployed to inflame the whole 
of Europe to the adoption of his opinion. The 
German Princes were the first who were prevail- 
ed on to move. I believe that Prince Kaunitz, 
the prime minister of the Emperor Leopold, dis- 
suaded his master from undertaking a war against 
France. The Emperor Joseph had left several 
parts of his dominions in a state of agitation ; 
particularly the Netherlands, and Hungary. The 
Empress Maria Theresa had been much beloved 
in the Netherlands; but the Emperor Joseph, her 
son, had contrived to set the monastic orders and 
the nobles in that country against him. Their 
discontent had led them to take arms ; but on 



227 

the death of the Emperor Joseph, his successor 
Leopold found means to appease them. Much 
ill humour however still remained among them. 
Matters were not much better in Hungary, where 
the Emperor Joseph had much disgusted the no- 
bles. Prince Kaunitz thought it would be more 
advantageous to the Emperor Leopold to regain 
the affections of his discontented subjects, than to 
embark in a war with France. But "this wise mi- 
nister was overruled : war was resolved on ; and 
the King of Prussia became the ally of the Em- 
peror. Mr. Burke seems to have had more dif- 
ficulty in England. He at length prevailed on 
the party of the great Whig families to declare 
for war. But Mr. Pitt hesitated. He yielded at 
last with reluctance. But though he consented 
that war should be undertaken, he does not ap- 
pear ever to have adopted Mr. Burke's opinion 
as to the motive for the war. Mr. Burke's opi- 
nion was, that war should be undertaken to re- 
establish France exactly in that state in which it 
had existed before the commencement of the Re- 
volution ; or, according to the technical language 
of that day, to re-establish the ancien regime. Mr- 
Pitt viewed it as a political war ; the object with 
him was a diminution of the power of France, 
The two objects were inconsistent with each 
other. The crusade has lasted nearly thirty years. 
Europe has already suffered much ; and I fear 
her sufferings are not at an end. 



228 

CHAPTER XV. 

On the Slave Trade. 

I was in the House of Commons during the 
discussions on the Abolition of the Slave Trade; 
but I never voted on the subject : there were cir- 
cumstances which led me to hesitate : and where 
I doubted on which side I ought to vote, I thought 
it most safe to abstain from voting at all. No 
man can like the Slave Trade. It is oppressive 
to the slave ; it is more injurious to the master, 
for it corrupts his morals ; accustoming him to 
believe, that he may live with other human crea- 
tures wit-bout being subject to the restraint of mo- 
ral duties. 

Perhaps there is no country in Europe in which 
the proportion of slaves to freemen was at one 
time greater than it was in England. I apprehend 
that this was owing to the Heptarchy. The di- 
vision of the country into seven kingdoms produ- 
ced wars : wars occasioned captives, and captives 
became slaves. Servi quia servabantur. The 
wise decisions of our courts of law, assisted by 
other circumstances, effectuated enfranchisement. 
I will mention some of these circumstances. First, 
the courts of law decided, that an illegitimate 
child could not be a slave, or, as our law calls 
him, a serf or villein. He could inherit no advan- 



229 

tage from his parents ; it would therefore have 
been unreasonable that he should inherit a disad- 
vantage. Secondly,. if the female slave, or, as she 
is called in our law books, a nieje, married a free- 
man, she became enfranchised during the cover- 
ture, and her children were free. Thirdly, if the 
male slave became a monk he became free. It 
was the same if the female slave became a nun. 
There were many other decisions of the courts of 
law, which favoured the enfranchisement of vil- 
leins. I will only mention one more, and I shall 
select that because it was made at so late a period 
as the reign of Richard II., and in opposition to 
the wishes of the legislature. If A, the villein of 
B, brought an action in a court of law against B, 
and B pleaded in bar of his action, though A failed 
in his suit, yet A, the villein, became enfranchi- 
sed ; for B, by pleading in bar to his action, had 
treated A as a freeman ; and he could not after- 
wards falsify his own admission. To prevent this 
inconvenience, B was under the necessity of plead- 
ing in abatement, or disability of A's person. His 
plea therefore would regularly have run in these 
words, " That he, B, was not bound to answer 
A's action, because that he, A, was his villein, re- 
gardant to B's manor of Wellington in the county 
of Somerset." To this plea in abatement, A, 
according to the regular course of pleading, ought 
to have replied in these words, viz. ; *' That he, 
A, was free, without this: that he, A, was the 
villein of B, regardant to B ? s manor of Welling- 

u 2 



230 

ton in the county of Somerset." Then, accord- 
ing to the ordinary rules of pleading, this ques- 
tion, whether A was a villein regardant to B's 
manor of Wellington in the county of Somerset, 
ought to have been tried by a jury of Somerset- 
shire. But, in favour of liberty, the courts of law 
departed from the ordinary course of pleading, 
and decided, that A should be allowed to plead in 
a manner different from what was commonly pre- 
scribed : and they allowed A to plead in these 
words, viz. " That he, A, was free," omitting 
any answer to the other part of B's plea. By this 
advantage thus allowed to A, the question or issue 
between A and B was no longer accompanied 
with any circumstances of locality. The issue or 
question between the parties was simply whether 
A was free, and was therefore to be tried by a 
jury of that county in which A had brought his 
action. In the seventeenth of Richard II. an Act 
of Parliament was passed, reciting an inconveni- 
ence from this mode of pleading, and applying a 
remedy. The act recited, that it often happened, 
that a villein fled into a town, where the inhabi- 
tants were disposed to favour the claim of free- 
dom. That he then brought a fictitious and co- 
lourable action against his lord, with a view to one 
of these two advantages, iitr. u That if the lord 
pleaded in bar of his action, he, the villein, might 
be enfranchised by his lord's plea : and if the lord 
pleaded in disability of his person, and in abate- 
ment of his action, that then the plea might be 



23i 

tried by a jury every way disposed to find in the 
villein's favour." To remedy this mischief, the 
statute enacted, that the lord might plead in bar 
of the villein's action ; accompanying his plea 
with a protestation, that the plaintiff was his vil- 
lein : and that a plea in bar, accompanied with 
this protestation, should not render the villein 
free. This statute was written in the French lan- 
guage. It was manifestly intended for the pro- 
tection of the lord's interest against the ill found- 
ed claim of his villein. Sir Edward Coke, in 
commenting on this statute, translated it incorrect- 
ly ; and having, from this circumstance, puzzled 
himself, concludes by saying, " it is a perplexed 
statute, and that he does not know what to make 
of it. 5 ' The words which Sir Edward Coke trans- 
lated incorrectly are the following. The statute 
recites, that the villein flies into a town, ou il est 
fort a trier envers son seigneur. Sir Etfward Coke 
translates these words, IVhere is it hard to try 
against his lord. Whereas the true translation is, 
IVhere he y the villein, is powerful in trial against 
his lord. And thus, by this mistake in the transla- 
tion, Sir Edward Coke supposes the legislature to 
have had in view a mischief directly the reverse 
of that which they really had in view, and which 
they wished to remedy. But the wise solicitude 
of our courts of law, to increase the number of 
freemen, defeated these efforts of the legislature to 
preserve the character of villeins in England. 
For the courts decided, that if the plaintiff reco- 



232 

vered, his action then could not be deemed ficti- 
tious and colourable. It was therefore not a case 
within the statute. The defendant was not enti- 
tled to any benefit under the statute, and the vil- 
lein was enfranchised by the defendant's plea. 

Perhaps one of the circumstances, which the 
most contributed to the enfranchisement of our 
villeins, is that which is generally considered as 
one of the greatest calamities recorded in our his- 
tory : I mean the long civil war between the 
houses of York and Lancaster. The lords en- 
franchised their villeins, that they might use them 
as soldiers. It is a common expression in the 
historians of that period, in speaking of a great 
lord who took part in the civil wars, seiuitia ar- 
tnavit. And, as an inducement to the villeins to 
serve as soldiers, they enfranchised them, and 
granted them lands to be held by copy of court 
roll. Sir Edward Coke, who wrote in the reign 
of James L, says, that half the land in England 
was at that time copyhold. As the proportion of 
copyhold land is now very much diminished, it is 
possible that some people may doubt the accura- 
cy of Sir Edward Coke's assei tion. But let it be 
recollected, that a great proportion of the land in 
the western counties was even ^o late as in the 
memory of people now living, held by leases for 
ninety-nine years determinable on lives. And 
wherever this practice prevailed, there is ^reat 
reason to believe, that the lands had antecedently 
been held by copy of court roll. 



233 

Wherever Slavery has prevailed, it has gene- 
rally been the result of conquest. On the fall of 
the Roman Empire, the Northern nations overran 
France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy, They es- 
tablished servitude in all these countries. The 
Normans conquered England. Whether they re- 
duced any of the Saxons to slavery, or were con- 
tented with the slaves whom they found in the 
island, is a question on which I have not formed 
any opinion. During the time of the Roman Re- 
public much of the population of Italy consisted 
of slaves. We know also, that a large proportion 
of the inhabitants of Athens were slaves. It was 
probably the same in other states of Greece. We 
find in the Old Testament, that Joseph was sold 
to the Midianites passing from Palestine into 
Egypt. If the practice of carrying slaves into 
Egypt had not been established, it is not proba- 
ble, either that Joseph's brethren would have 
thought of selling him, or that the Midianites 
would have purchased him. These Midianites 
were probably a caravan of slave merchants. 

Let it not be supposed, that I am a friend to 
Slavery, because I thus remark on its antiquity. 
My only difficulty is about the best means of 
abolishing Slavery. I doubt whether it ever can 
be abolished by the means which have been 
adopted. The inhabitants of the southern and 
western parts of the United States of America 
will with great reluctance be brought to relinquish 
the use of slaves. In Spanish and Portuguese 



234 

America, all attempts to abolish the Slave Trade 
will be unsuccessful. I have remarked, that the 
change of the race of the inhabitants has in most 
countries been occasioned by conquest. But 
this will not be the case in respect to the Negroes 
carried to America. They will be carried there 
as slaves, but the inhabitants will gradually be- 
come a mixed race. 

When the Abolition of the Slave Trade was 
first suggested in the House of Commons, I did 
not think, that the means, by which it was pro- 
posed that the abolition should be effected, were 
judicious. I had entirely approved of the mea- 
sures by which it was hoped that the sufferings of 
the slaves in their passage from Africa to the 
West Indies might be diminished. The bounty 
given to those captains, who transported their 
slaves with the smallest average loss, appeared 
likely to produce the most beneficial consequences. 
I thought this idea should have been farther ex- 
tended. I thought no slaves should be allowed 
to be transported from Africa to the islands, ex- 
cept in large ships. In a large ship the number 
of the crew frees them from apprehension of the 
insurrection of their slaves. And from this cir- 
cumstance, they are enabled to allow more indul- 
gence to the Negroes. The number of the slaves 
on board each ship ought by law to have been re- 
gulated, and proportioned to the tonnage. I be- 
lieve, that since the open exportation of slaves has 
been prohibited, much misery has been experi- 



235 

enced by the slaves, from their being carried by 
contraband in small ships immoderately crowded. 
But my chief hope of an amelioration in the con- 
dition of the slaves was from the decisions of the 
courts of law. I believe, that the courts in the 
West Indies still persevere in not permitting a 
Negro to give evidence in any cause, either civil 
or criminal. I cannot conceive how this maxim 
has arisen. It certainly is not drawn from the 
common law of England. If the veracity of the 
witness is doubted, from the circumstance of his 
being a slave, let the objection go to his credit, 
not to his competency. As the law now stands, 
the Negro is considered as below the rank of a 
reasonable being. When the Negroes were 
brought to the island, the legislature ought to 
have provided, as far as possible, that every Ne- 
gro should be annexed to some plantation : that 
he should become gleka ascriptus, and that he 
should never afterwards be sold to any other mas- 
ter except with the plantation. As the law now 
stands, the judgment creditor may levy his debt 
by the sale of the Negroes on the plantation, and 
thus break the nearest connections. Privileges 
might have been granted to such Negroes as were 
born within the island, for they are not so likely 
to take part in insurrection as the Negroes newly 
imported. By these, and other similar regula- 
tions, the legislature and the courts of law might 
have ameliorated the condition of the Negro, and 
gradually elevated him to the character of a sub- 



236 

ject. But this plan was not approved of. The 
Trade was to be immediately abolished : its abo- 
lition was voted by Parliament ; but it has not yet 
been effected. And I doubt whether that aboli- 
tion ever will be effected by the means pursued. 



CHAPTER XVI. 

Will Revolution produce an increase of Happiness 
to Mankind ? 

This is a question, which must frequently 
recur to every reflecting mind. I have no hesita- 
tion in saying, that I think Revolution will add to 
the happiness of mankind. The only country in 
which we have yet seen a Revolutionary Govern- 
ment completely established is America : and there 
the prosperity of the people has been more rapid- 
ly increased than it is probable that it would have 
been under the old Government, Before the in- 
dependence of the United States of America, the 
governors sent from Great Britain to its colonies 
were, for the nlost part, necessitous courtiers ; 
and the object of Government was to check the 
growth of the Colonies. 

In France the Revolution is not yet completed: 
for although a Representative Government is es- 



237 

tablished, those who are entrusted with the exer- 
cise of that Government are considered by the 
People as desirous of destroying it. The atten- 
tion of the People is therefore employed anxious- 
ly to watch over the Executive Government, and 
to defeat its efforts. I will add, that the improve- 
ments already derived from the Revolution in 
France are so great and so visible, that the People 
will never submit to see the ancien regime re-es- 
tablished. 

In Spain we at present only see the beginning 
of a revolution : but the seed is sown, and a Re- 
volutionary Government will be established in 
that country. Probably Governments will be es- 
tablished in the Spanish Colonies of a character 
similar to that which is about to be established in 
the mother country. This will be fortunate ; for 
similitude of government will promote their inter- 
course and connection with each other. One cir- 
cumstance will probably be an immediate conse- 
quence of a revolution in Spain. If the Spanish 
Government remains unaltered, Cuba must very 
soon belong either to the United States of Ame- 
rica or to Great Britain. But if Revolutionary 
Governments are established in Old Spain and 
the Spanish Colonies on the Continent, Cuba may 
adopt a similar government, and become a mem- 
ber of that confederacy. A revolution in Old 
Spain, if accompanied by the establishment of free 
Governments in her Colonies, will produce a most 
rapid improvement. Her agriculture, her manu- 



238 

factures, her commerce, and her naval power, will 
soon increase to such an extent as must give her 
great weight in the affairs of Europe. I have said 
her naval power ; for an unfettered intercourse be- 
tween Old Spain and the Spanish Colonies will 
create a marine, equal to that which now exists 
in any other state in Europe. 

I am not sufficiently acquainted with the state 
of Germany, or Italy, to be able to form any opi- 
nion how far it is probable, that a Revolutionary 
Government may be established in either of those 
two countries. 

In Great Britain we have a Representative Go- 
vernment. Some few abuses have been allowed 
to creep into it : correct those abuses, and Revo- 
lution will not take place. But if those abuses 
are not corrected, an Oligarchy will be establish- 
ed, which will fetter Royalty, humiliate Aristocra- 
cy, and trample on the People. Such an Oligar- 
chy will be removable only by Revolution. 




239 



CHAPTER XVII. 

On the Consequences of the Revolution in Spain. 

Toulouse, March 14, 1820. 

An account has been this morning received in 
this city, that the King of Spain has accepted the 
Constitution declared by the Cortes in 1812. 
This circumstance must influence the happiness 
of many millions. I have already made some re- 
marks on the probability of such an event ; but 
now that the Revolution in Spain is complete, I 
am unavoidably led to extend my reflections. The 
first circumstance which will occur to every man 
is, that there is now a second revolution in Europe, 
brought about by the standing army of the coun- 
try. For although the commercial cities and 
men of education were joined with the army in 
producing this Revolution, yet the army was cer- 
tainly the most efficient instrument. Knowledge 
had spread itself in the Spanish army, and it rose 
to rescue its country from wretchedness and igno- 
miny. 

The first country in which we have seen a new 
Government established by Revolution is Ame- 
rica. The obstinate perseverance of George III., 
in his endeavours to compel the inhabitants of the 



240 

British Colonies to submit to a violation of their 
rights, has given birth to a new nation, called the 
United States of America. The Government 
established in this nation is without King, or No- 
bles, or political Church : and history does not 
afford us an example of any nation, in which the 
happiness of the inhabitants, or the prosperity of 
the whole, considered collectively, has been more 
rapidly increased. There were primary causes, 
which must at some moment or other have pro- 
duced a change in the French Government : but 
the Revolution in America certainly accelerated 
the Revolution in France. 

The French Revolution has brought forward 
the Revolution in Spain. In both these countries 
revolution has been the work of standing armies. 
Kings have been accustomed to consider standing 
armies as that support of their power on which 
they could most rely : let them ponder on what 
they have seen in France and in Spain. German 
Princes have been already led to this reflection by 
what has taken place in France ; and they have 
entertained a hope, that they should be able to 
stop the progress of liberty by what they have 
been pleased to denominate a Holy Alliance ; for 
this is the name which Kings have impudently 
given to their confederacy against the liberties of 
mankind. This Holy Alliance has not been able 
to prevent the Revolution in Spain. Whatever 
may be the wish of the Bourbons in France, they 
have not dared to send their troops to the assis- 



241 

tance of Ferdinand. Had they sent French troops, 
these would most probably have joined the insur- 
gents ; and they hesitated to employ their Swiss 
corps. They endeavoured to retain in France 
those Spanish patriots, who had been obliged to 
take refuge in that country: but even in this their 
efforts were ineffectual ; for most of the Spanish 
refugees found means to return to Spain. Aus- 
tria and Prussia could send no assistance to the 
King of Spain, because they had no shipping to 
transport their troops ; and although Russia might 
have sent assistance by sea, it could not have ar- 
rived in Spain before the summer. Knowledge 
has spread itself in the army of the King of Prus- 
sia. What sentiments must not he be inspired 
with by this Spanish Revolution ? Can he enter- 
tain the hope, that his army will assist him to keep 
down the general wish of his subjects for a Re- 
presentative Government? Throughout the Pro- 
testant part of Germany this wish is everywhere 
prevalent ; and it does not appear, that there is in 
any part of Germany much personal attachment 
from the subjects to their sovereigns. In the Ca- 
tholic part of Germany knowledge has made less 
progress : it is probable therefore, that a Revolu- 
tion will not take place in the Catholic part of 
Germany, so soon as it will in the Protestant part. 
The impending downfal of the Papal power will 
occasion a change in the Government of Italy. I 
will not pretend to say what effects such a change 
may produce. There can be little doubt but that 

x2 



242 

Portugal will soon follow the example of Spairt, 
The Braganza family cannot hold both Brazil and 
Portugal : whichever of these two countries this 
family may choose to reside in, the other will 
withdraw itself from its subjection. Whether the 
animosity which has so long subsisted between 
the Portuguese and Spaniards will prevent Por- 
tugal from uniting itself to Spain, I cannot say ; 
but the union would be advantageous to both 
countries. Should a Representative Government 
be established in Spain, a similar constitution in 
her American Provinces, and the whole united 
by a Confederacy, the Spanish empire will in- 
stantly become of the first importance, both in 
Europe and in America. The United States of 
America will probably first feel her influence : 
she will not consent to the cession of the two Flori- 
das. The province of Mexico is much interested 
to prevent this cession ; and, when supported by 
the mother country, Mexico will be able to pre- 
vent it. 

A Confederacy, such as I have suggested, will 
create the most formidable barrier to the growth 
of the United States of America. It will check 
their growth to the westward : for although the 
western part of the United States is the richest 
country, and that from which the greatest im- 
provement may be expected, yet it is at present 
the least defensible part : the Spanish force would 
be able to prevent its progress. Cuba, likewise, 
would be preserved from the dominion, either of 



243 

the United States of America, or of Great Britain. 
The same language, with similitude of habits, and 
descent from the same common ancestors, render 
such a Confederacy probable. It is possible, that 
the cruelties practised during the late civil war in 
America may have alienated the inhabitants of that 
country from Old Spain ; but those cruelties are 
more justly to be attributed to Ferdinand and his 
ministers, than to the people of Spain. Both 
hemispheres have been struggling for the same 
object: viz. civil liberty. 

This newly created Spanish empire will have 
the means of commerce beyond any other nation 
in the world. Commerce will give her a military 
marine. Towards the close of the fifteenth cen- 
tury, when Ferdinand united Castile and Arragon 
by his marriage with Isabella, Spain was more 
advanced than any other nation of Europe, in 
science, in literature, in agriculture, in commerce, 
and, above all, in the love of civil liberty. Is it 
not possible, that we may soon see the Spanish 
character renewed in all its strength, the ornament 
of the human race ? But even though such a 
Confederacy should not take place, Mexico will 
check the growth of the United States, and pre- 
vent them from acquiring either the Floridas or 
Cuba. 

Another consequence of the tranquillity likely 
to take place in Spanish America will be the in- 
crease of her productions, both agricultural and 
mineral ; and new branches of commerce will be 



£44 

opened both with India and China. The esta- 
blishment of a free Constitution in Spain will form 
an epoch in the history of mankind. 

We have seen, for some years past, attempts 
to stop the exportation of Slaves from Africa to 
America. I have already said, in the course of 
these reflections, that I always thought that these 
efforts would be ineffectual. If the Spanish Co- 
lonies severally establish Representative Govern- 
ments, they will not submit to be prohibited from 
transporting Negroes from Africa to America. 
Their desire to bring that fertile country into cul- 
tivation will induce them to resist the restraint. 
The arguments, which have been employed to 
excite an abhorrence of the Slave Trade, have 
been of two sorts ; viz. first, that the trade was 
repugnant to humanity ; secondly, that it was 
repugnant to the Christian religion. Political 
objections, which perhaps are the strongest, 
have not been much resorted to. I will acknow- 
ledge, that I have never been able to discover 
any passage, either in the Old or New Tes- 
tament, prohibiting such a trade. Joseph was 
certainly sold by his brethren to a caravan of slave 
merchants. This was an act of wickedness ; but 
it is censured only as the wicked act of individuals. 
I do not recollect in the New Testament any re- 
ference to the trade in Slaves. In respect to the 
inhumanity consequent on the Slave Trade, every 
man must think of it with extreme regret, but 
there certainly are means, by which the sufferings 
of the Negroes may be diminished. Nations 



245 

have most commonly changed their places of 
abode in the shape of conquering armies: the Ne- 
groes change it in the character of slaves : it may- 
be doubtful which mode occasions the greatest 
loss of human life. As late as the treaty of 
Utrecht, we bargained for the exclusive privilege 
of selling Negroes in Spanish America ; and we 
did not relinquish this privilege till the peace of 
Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748. If my memory is not 
incorrect, the negociation for peace between Mr. 
Pitt and M. Bussy, in 1761, failed of success, be- 
cause Mr. Pitt demanded a cession of more fac- 
tories on the western side of Africa, than the French 
minister chose to yield. Those factories were 
only wanted for the purpose of carrying on the 
Slave Trade more extensively. I mention these 
circumstances with a view to remind those, who 
are most zealous for the abolition, to how late a 
period the Trade in Slaves has not been consi- 
dered as immoral. If, when fairly contemplated, 
it is found to increase human misery, every man 
must wish it to be abolished ; but the improve- 
ment of those parts of America, which are yet un- 
cultivated, will most probably render its abolition 
impracticable. 

A Representative Government in Spain will 
render the re-establishment of the ancien regime 
in France impossible. Nobles and fanatics may 
make the attempt, but it will only occasion their 
own destruction. 

When, in a former place, I spoke of a Revolt* 



* 246 

lion in Spain, I spoke of it only as a probable 
event ; but a Revolution has now actually taken 
place in that country. The Constitution, which 
the people call for, is that which the Cortes voted 
in 1812; and if it should be ultimately adopted, 
the Government of Spain must be considered as 
republican. The Spanish Colonies in America 
are in a different situation now from what they 
were in 1812. Most probably they will be form- 
ed into Independent States, and united with the 
mother country by a Confederacy. Such an ar- 
rangement would give more force to the Confede- 
rated States of the Spanish Empire than they could 
possess if under one government. Portugal will 
very soon follow her example. 

What influence must not the Spanish Revolu- 
tion have on France ? At the commencement of 
this winter, the object of the French Government 
was confined to the change of the law of Elec- 
tions, and of the law for recruiting the Army. 
By changing the first, they hoped to give to the 
Noblesse more influence in the election of the 
Chamber of Deputies : by changing the latter, 
they hoped to give to the Noblesse the commis- 
sions in the army. The assassination of the 
Duke de Berri induced -the French Government 
to extend their views: and they have brought for- 
ward two other projects ; viz. a bill for re-estab- 
lishing lettres de cachet, and another bill for es- 
tablishing a censure on the Press. The first pro- 
ject has been carried into effect : the two Cham 



247 

bers have passed it into a law. The second will 
most probably be adopted. The pretence for the 
censure on the Press is, that the minds of men are 
heated by political publications ; and this is true. 
But Louvel will most probably be found to have 
been excited to the assassination of the Duke de 
Berri by those publications, which held out the 
necessity of re-establishing the ancien regime ; and 
these are publications, which the French Govern- 
ment does not wish to repress. Lettres de cachet 
can have very little effect where the bias of the na- 
tion is opposed to the wishes of the Government. 
The army, the commercial interest, and men of 
reading and reflection, unite in wishing to pre- 
serve a Representative Government in France. 
The noblesse, the fanatics, and the Bourbons, op- 
pose them. The strength of the two parties is 
so unequal, that there can be little doubt which 
must be overpowered. Revolution will proba* 
bly soon take place in the Protestant part of Ger- 
many ; perhaps even in the Catholic part. 

England may avert Revolution: but it can on- 
ly avert it by a Reform of the House of Com- 
mons. I will acknowledge, that I have accus- 
tomed myself to think, that this Reform might 
be effected by correcting abuses, and repairing 
on the old foundation ; and that I have listened 
with aversion to the proposal of Universal Suf- 
frage. The new Spanish Constitution seems to 
hold out something, which approaches very near 
to Universal Suffrage : it remains to be seen whe- 



248 

ther it can be carried into effect. But when the 
People of England see a pure Representative 
Government established in the United States of 
America, in Spain, in France, perhaps even in 
Portugal ; can it be supposed, that they will be 
content with that mutilated and disfigured Repre- 
sentation, which now exists in the House of Com- 
mons? They certainly will require a more perfect 
Representation of the People. They will be led 
to call for this, not solely from theoretical reflec- 
tions, but from their sufferings under that immo- 
derate load of taxes, which has been imposed 
on them in consequence of the unnecessary wars 
of George III. 

A Question. Will not the hatred excited by 
Kings against the principles of Liberty excite, in 
the course of its re-action ; hatred to the Magis- 
tracy of Royalty? 



249 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

On the Consequences of the Transition from an 
Agricultural to a Manufacturing and Commer- 
cial Character. 

At the commencement of the Rebellion, in 
1640, England must be considered as an agricul- 
tural nation. The cod fishery on the banks of 
Newfoundland was scarcely discovered ; and the 
herring fishery, at that time the great fishery of 
Europe, was in the possession of the Dutch. 
The Dutch also possessed the carrying trade. 
The French were the manufacturers of Europe. 
England possessed scarcely any manufacture, 
except that of woollen. This she owed to the 
refuge, which Queen Elizabeth had afforded to 
the manufacturers driven out of the Low Coun- 
tries by the Duke of Alva. The Navigation 
Act, established by Oliver Cromwell, gave the 
first spring to English commerce ; and from that 
period to the present day we have gradually re- 
linquished the character of an agricultural, and 
assumed that of a manufacturing and commercial 
nation. From the peace of Aix la Chapelle, in 
1748, to the commencement of the seven vears* 
war, in 1756, England seems still to have re- 
gained its agricultural character. The price of 

v 



250 

corn was low. The Journals of the House oi 
Commons show, that, during that period, a large 
sum of money was annually granted to assist the 
export of our corn. 

The wars during the reign of George III. seem 
to have had the greatest effect in producing the 
change. I will not presume to state how they 
have produced this change ; but I believe they 
have produced it. They have changed the na- 
ture of the property from real to personal ; for 
the National Debt, as well as the increased 
moveable, is all personal property. This transi- 
tion has changed the national character. War has 
been so advantageous to many individuals, that 
the people have been easily deluded into unne- 
cessary wars. From the commencement of the 
year 1775 to the present time (a space of forty- 
five years) we can scarcely be said to have had 
more than ten years of peace. An immense debt 
has been the consequence. During the war begun 
in 1793, the opposition concurred with the mini- 
stry in the wish for war: taxes were therefore laid 
with very little consideration of the manner in 
which they bore upon the people. The only ob- 
ject was to destroy those French principles, on 
the destruction of which certain great nobles had 
persuaded themselves that their power depended. 
Their efforts failed : the principles of the French 
Revolution have been established ; and Great 
Britain is left with a debt, a great part of which 
she must either get rid of, or relinquish her sta- 



251 

tion among the other nations of the world. Divi- 
dends payable by the public are of the nature of 
pensions ; with this difference, that dividends 
have been sold by the public, while pensions 
have been gratuitously granted. But whether 
sold or gratuitously granted, if they exceed what 
the public revenue can pay, they will necessarily 
be diminished. Whenever the event happens, 
the distress will be extreme : I think of it with 
terror: but I know the time will come when Troy 
must fall ! 

It is to be hoped, that those men who may be in 
power when this event shall take place will do 
every thing they can to diminish the calamity. 
The most rigorous retrenchment, the abolition of 
gratuitous Pensions and unnecessary Places, the 
sale of Crown Lands, perhaps even of Church 
and Corporation Lands, ought all to be resorted 
to before a suspension of dividends should take 
place. Above all, we should avoid embarking in 
any more unnecessary wars. Let the nations of 
the world settle themselves as they please, or 
rather in the manner which chance may occasion. 
No statesman has sufficient penetration to foresee 
the effects of that war in which he embarks his 
country. We began the crusade against French 
principles in the year 1793. Did those who be- 
gan that war expect the consequences which have 
followed from it? For French principles have 
most certainly been established in France, and 
will most probably be established in Spain and her 



252 

Colonies. I believe, that none of those, who ex- 
cited us to war in Spain, will venture to say, that 
they at that time wished to see the principles of 
Civil Liberty established in that country; yet they 
will probably live to see those principles establish- 
ed there. Did those ministers, who in April 1806 
brought forward the doctrine of blockade, intend 
to establish manufactures in Germany ? Human 
foresight is too uncertain to justify ministers in 
risking the happiness of nations by embarking in 
speculative projects. 

There is one class of men, whose character has 
been remarkably changed by this transition from 
real to personal property : I mean the Lawyers. 
I began my attendance in Westminster Hall in 
January, 1765. Lord Mansfield was at that time 
Chief Justice of the King's Bench. He was not 
only a man of great abilities, but he possessed a 
great store of legal knowledge acquired by patient 
reading. I am aware, that this is an opinion not 
generally entertained of him. Vanity led him to 
wish to intimate, that he did every thing by ge- 
nius, and nothing by industry ; and perhaps this 
induced men to believe, that he was not what the 
lawyers call a black lettered lawyer : but he cer- 
tainly had a great store of knowledge, well trea- 
sured up ; and, as far as I could observe, he was 
a very upright judge. Were I to mark the fail- 
ing, which was most prominent in his character, 
it would be his want of courage : he seemed to 
me alwavs to stand in fear of Sir Fletcher Nor- 



253 

| 

ton ; but I very much doubt whether he had any 
good will to him. On the right hand of Lord 
Mansfield sat Mr. Justice Wilmot, a very learned 
judge, formed by much reading and reflection. 
He tried causes at Nisi Prius with the most com- 
mendable patience and the strictest integrity. On 
the left hand of the Chief Justice sat Sir Joseph 
Yates, a well-read lawyer, particularly eminent 
for his knowledge of pleadings. The fourth 
judge, who took his seat on the bench the day on 
which I first attended the court, was Sir Richard 
Aston. He was a man of a very old family in the 
North — I believe in Cheshire. I had an oppor- 
tunity of seeing him several times in the character 
of judge on the Western Circuit. He tried causes 
with strict integrity ; and though, perhaps, he had 
not that store of legal learning, which was pos- 
sessed by his three colleagues, he was a man of 
sound sense, and his decisions were generally 
right. 

Whoever contemplates the characters of these 
four judges will, I believe, concur with me in opi- 
nion, that no man ought to expect, that the Court 
of King's Bench should ever be better filled. 
These judges had all been formed by patient read- 
ing and thinking. The books to which they had 
applied themselves are those, which have handed 
down to us the law of real property from remote 
times. These books had given to the lawyer a 
species of logic peculiar to his profession. It was 
not the same with the logic of the Schoolmen, but 

y 2 



254 , 

it was more powerful. When employed by Lit- 
tleton, the mind is kept on the stretch, as it is by 
the reasoning of Aristotle. In the hands of Sir 
Edward Coke, it approaches nearer to the subtle- 
ty of Locke. 

I have no doubt, but that you will see upon the 
bench, in future times, men equal in natural abili- 
ties to those whom I have mentioned ; but they 
will not have been formed in the same manner : 
they will have been formed at the desk, not by 
patient reading. By .the old mode of education, 
the lawyer first acquired science, and afterwards 
immersed himself in practice. By the modern 
mode, he begins with that knowledge which is to 
be acquired by practice, and he must emerge to 
science, if he ever acquires it. Lawyers, formed 
according to the modern mode, will perhaps have 
more dexterity in the application of their know- 
ledge, than lawyers formed according to the old 
mode : perhaps they may be even more useful 
advocates for private clients : but it is to be fear- 
ed, that they will be deficient on great constitu- 
tional questions. Lord Somers remarked to King 
William, that it was of great importance to the 
crown, that the bench should be filled with Con- 
stitutional Lawyers. 

I will now mention a few circumstances respect- 
ing the characters of those advocates, whom I 
found in possession of business when I first atten- 
ded Westminster Hall. Mr. Serjeant Glynn 
possessed the largest store of legal knowledge. 



255 
i 

1 recollect a conversation, which I had with Mr, 
Serjeant Hill on this subject, towards the latter 
end of that gentleman's life. I mentioned to him 
Mr. Dunning, and asked whether he was not equal 
in legal knowledge to Mr. Serjeant Glynn ? He 
answered, "No, every thing which Dunning knew, 
he knew accurately ; but Glynn knew a great deal 
more." I need scarcely mention Mr. Serjeant 
Hill's own character as a lawyer. His death hap- 
pened so very few years ago, that his legal repu- 
tation is known to every one. He was full of 
knowledge ; but, in conversing with him, it was 
very difficult to keep him from wandering from 
that subject on which you wished to be informed. 
He hated the law of tythes ; he said, " that the 
decisions on that branch of the law were founded 
in folly and injustice." Whenever I conversed 
with him on this subject, he became in a very 
short time so heated, that there was no getting any 
farther information from him. 

I have heard the late 'Mr. Serjeant Walker 
say, that Mr. Serjeant Prime was the ablest law- 
yer he had ever known ; and I recollect an anec- 
dote told me by Lord Thurlow respecting this 
gentleman. Lord Thurlow said, " I drove Mr. 
Serjeant Prime from the bar, without intending 
it. I happened to be walking up and down 
Westminster Hall with him while Dr. Florence 
Henzey was on his trial in the Court of King's 
Bench for High Treason. Serjeant Prime was at 
that time the King's Prime Serjeant, and as such 



256 

had precedence over all lawyers in the King's 
service. But the ministers of that day wished 
to pay court to Sir Fletcher Norton, though at 
that time he had no other rank than that of King's 
Counsel : they had therefore entrusted the con- 
duct of the trial to Sir Fletcher Norton. I hap- 
pened/' said Lord Thurlow, " to make this re- 
mark to Mr. Serjeant Prime : 'It is a little sin- 
gular, Sir, that I should be walking up and down 
Westminster Hall with the King's Prime Ser- 
jeants while a trial at bar for High Treason is 
going on in that Court.' The expression struck 
him : he felt the affront which had been put on 
him : he went the next morning, resigned his of- 
fice, and retired from the profession." 

There are two other men of the profession, on 
whom I cannot refrain from making a few obser- 
vations. I knew them both intimately: I loved 
them both; for both were peculiarly kind to me: 
I mean Mr. Dunning, afterwards Lord Ashbur- 
ton ; and Mr. Thurlow, afterwards Lord Thur- 
low. Mr. Dunning was the quickest man I ever 
knew at the Bar. If an objection was to be taken 
or answered at Nisi Prius, he did it on the in- 
stant : his style of reasoning was sometimes too 
subtle for his hearers. Mr. Thurlow was not a 
quick man ; I have often heard him make a speech 
at Nisi Prius, while he was considering what an- 
swer he should give to an objection taken by his 
adversary. He had a magniloquentia, which was 
•always imposing ; but perhaps neither his style 



257 

of speaking, nor his legal knowledge, nor the 
powers of his mind, were suited to the common 
run of Nisi Prius practice. He obtained no in- 
considerable share of business in the Court of 
King's Bench at an early period of his life. Lord 
Mansfield checked his progress ; not from ill- 
will to Mr. Thurlow, but from a wish to pay 
court to Sir Fletcher Norton. I will give an in- 
stance of this, much talked of when I first at- 
tended the courts. Mr. Thurlow had to argue 
against the execution of a power in a marriage 
settlement : he took three objections : he argued 
the two first objections with great ability, and 
closed with telling the court, that he thought the 
case so clear on the two objections which he had 
argued, that he would not trouble them with any 
argument on his third objection. When Lord 
Mansfield delivered the opinion of the court, two 
or three days afterwards, he did it in these words: 
11 Mr. Thurlow, we decide against your client on 
the two objections which you have argued ; we 
decide in his favour on the objection which you 
have abandoned." No young lawyer could rise 
while exposed to such unfavourable remarks. I 
saw him afterwards for several years in the Court 
of King's Bench, a King's Counsel, almost with- 
out business. Soon after he had begun to obtain 
some degree of practice at the bar, he was put in- 
to the House of Commons for the Borough of 
Tamworth, by Lord Weymouth. 1 have been 
told, that he was at first heard with very little at- 



258 

tention : I saw him afterwards the most powerful 
and the most useful lawyer ever possessed by a 
minister in that House. He was made Chancel- 
lor in 1778 : when the Coalition came into power 
in the spring of 1783, Mr. Fox deprived him of 
the Great Seal. He accompanied this depriva- 
tion with circumstances of harshness, which 
always surprised me : harshness was not conge- 
nial to the natural disposition of Mr. Fox ; and 
there was no personal enmity between them ; for 
Lord Thurlow always spoke of Mr. Fox with 
partiality, and continued to do so to the day of his 
death. On Mr. Pitt's return to office, on the 20th 
December, 1783, Lord Thurlow again received 
the Great Seal. It is well known, that for some 
years before Lord Thurlow was a second time de- 
prived of the Great Seal, he and Mr. Pitt had not 
lived on pleasant terms. I never could discover 
the cause of this. I recollect Lord Thurlow's 
having once said to me, " When Mr. Pitt first 
became Prime Minister, it was a very unpleasant 
thing to do business with him ; but it afterwards 
became as pleasant to do business with him as 
with Lord North." Every one knows, that in- 
tercourse with Lo»d North was peculiarly plea- 
sant. Lord Thurlow strongly disapproved of 
Mr. Pitt's conduct on the impeachment of Mr. 
Hastings : how far that contributed to excite ill 
humour in him I cannot say. Lord North once 
said to me, " Your friend Lord Thurlow thinks, 
that his personal influence with the King autho* 



259 

rises him to treat Mr. Pitt with humeur. Take 
my word for it, whenever Mr. Pitt says to the 
King, ' Sir, the Great Seal must be in other hands/ 
the King will take the Great Seal from Lord 
Thurlow, and never think any more about him." 
It turned out exactly as Lord North had said to 
me : the Kjng took the Great Seal from Lord 
Thurlow, and never concerned himself about him 
afterwards. I have no doubt, that this conduct 
of the King was wholly unexpected by Lord 
Thurlow : it mortified him most severely. I re- 
collect his saying to me, " No man has a right to 
treat another in the way in which the King has 
treated me : we cannot meet again in the same 
room." But Lord Thurlow had not read the 
character of his master with the penetration of 
Lord North. 



CHx\PTER XIX. 

On the Consequences of a King of Great Britain 
being a German Sovereign. 

The Brunswick family was selected to wear 
the Crown of England, as the best means of se- 
curing us from the return of popery and despo- 
tism. The establishment of this family, on the 



260 

death of Queen Anne, has preserved us from those 
evils which we dreaded. But the benefits which 
we have received have been mixed with some 
alloy. We have the character of George I. 
sketched by the hand of the Earl of Chesterfield, 
He had opportunities of approaching this Monarch, 
and I believe he has given us a correct character 
of him. He tells us, that he was a dull German 
gentleman. That he neither understood, nor con- 
cerned himself about the interests of England ; 
but that he was well acquainted with the interests 
of Hanover. One of his first acts, after his acces- 
sion, was to prevail on the British Parliament to 
purchase for him the Duchies of Bremen and 
Verden, from the King of Denmark, for the sum 
of 250,000/. This act was unjust, impolitic, and 
a violation of good faith. During the difficulties 
of Charles XII. of Sweden, the King of Denmark 
had seized on these territories. It was evident, 
that the King of Denmark, who had not a pre- 
tence of right, would not be able to keep them. 
It was therefore a purchase of stolen goods from a 
thief, who, if we had not purchased, must have 
abandoned them. It was impolitic ; for it render- 
ed Sweden the enemy of Great Britain for very 
many years. It was also a violation of that treaty 
of Munster, in 1648, which England had guaran- 
teed. I believe the pretence for calling on Eng- 
land to pay this money was the advantage which 
she derived from her trade up the river Weser ; 
an advantage which she could not have been de- 



261 

prived of, even if the King of Denmark had kept 
the territories. During this reign, we were in- 
volved in all the mysteries of German politics. 
We engaged in a war with Spain in 1718, in sup- 
port of the views of the Emperor of Germany. 
It was a subject in which Great Britain was 
wholly uninterested. Fortunately, the war was 
short. 

Perhaps the character of George II. may be 
drawn nearly in the same words as that of his 
father. He was a dull German. Possibly the ex- 
pression gejitleman, might be left out ; for he was 
sometimes coarse and brutal. The war of 1741 
had originated in a dispute with Spain. It might 
have been begun for British interests : it was con- 
tinued in consequence of German connections. 
The same may be said of the war of 1756. It 
was begun for the support of British interests in 
America ; but the lavish expenditure and the con- 
tinuance of this war, were for the support of 
George the Second's views and interests in Ger- 
many. 

When George III., in his first address to the 
British Parliament, made use of these words, 
" Born and educated in this country, I glory in the 
name of Briton," the expression was hailed with 
joy. The nation thought, that they had got a 
British King, and that German interests would 
not in future be attended to ; but they have been 
mistaken. Though George III. never visited 
Hanover, yet in the progress of his life he became 



262 

in character as truly a German Prince as ever his 
grandfather had been. All his younger sons were 
sent to Hanover to be educated. They returned 
to England fashioned after the manner of the 
younger sons of a German Prince. The enlarge- 
ment of His Majesty's German dominions seems 
to have been as much the object of attention in 
the reign of George III. as it was in the reign of 
George I. or George II. George I. acquired 
Bremen and Verden. George II. acquired the 
Duchy of Saxe Lawenberg. But the acquisitions 
during the reign of George III. have been more 
extensive and more important. By the treaty of 
Amiens he acquired the Bishopric of Osnaburg ; 
and by the late arrangements at Vienna the rich 
Bishopric of Hildesheim, with the Duchy of Min- 
den and principality of East Friesland, have been 
added to his German dominions. The title of 
Elector has also been changed for that of King of 
Hanover. What difference was intended to be 
produced by this change I cannot say. It may 
perhaps be imagined, that, as the Duke of York 
was Bishop of Osnaburg, the King, his father, 
had some right to the acquisition of that Bisho- 
pric. But this is a mistake : Osnaburg and Hil- 
desheim have both been obtained by acts of injus- 
tice. During the thirty years war, which prece- 
ded the treaty of Munster in 1648, every Protes- 
tant Prince in Germany took possession of the 
dominions of those ecclesiastical princes whom he 
was able to oppress. I believe, that during that 



263 

period, the Elector of Brandenburg got possession 
of thirteen ecclesiastical sovereignties, and by the 
Treaty of Minister he got them annexed to his 
dominions. A Prince of the House of Brunswick 
Lunenburg had got possession of the Bishopric 
of Osnaburg, and wished to have it allotted to him 
as a temporal fief. The Roman Catholic powers 
saw that it was necessary to resist the views 
which the Protestant Princes had formed of secu- 
larizing the different Bishoprics in Germany, 
They decided to make a stand on the question for 
secularizing Osnaburg. After much discussion, 
the matter was compromised : it was agreed, that 
the Bishop should alternately be Catholic and Lu- 
theran ; that the Catholic Bishop should be elect- 
ed by the chapter, and the Lutheran Bishop 
named by the Duke of Brunswick Lunenburg. 
This arrangement was adhered to until the treaty 
of Amiens in 1802. By that treaty the chapter 
was deprived of its right of alternately nominating 
the Bishop, and the whole Bishopric secularized 
in favour of the Elector of Hanover. Those sove- 
reigns who engaged in the crusade against French 
principles were, I have no doubt, as they profess- 
ed, enemies to the violation of established rights ; 
or, to use a fashionable expression, they were ene- 
mies to the violation of la legitimise. Yet, some 
how or other, it has so happened, that there is 
scarcely one German Prince, who has been a par- 
ty in this crusade, who has not violated the rights 



264 

of his weaker neighbour for his own immediate 
benefit. 

The British Nation saw with pleasure the pro- 
bability of the Princess Charlotte succeeding to 
the throne of Great Britain. Their pleasure arose 
from this circumstance ; that by her succession 
Great Britain would be disentangled from her 
connection with Hanover. For as the King's 
German dominions are male fiefs, the Princess 
Charlotte was not capable of succeeding to them. 
Our hopes were that time disappointed. We 
now flatter ourselves with a similar hope from the 
succession of the daughter of his late Royal High- 
ness the Duke of Kent and Strathern. Should she 
succeed to the throne, we may have the good for- 
tune to possess in her a Sovereign exclusively 
British. 

I have thus stated the inconveniences which 
have arisen from the House of Brunswick being 
possessed of dominions in Germany. I do not 
mean by this statement to undervalue the advan- 
tages which we have obtained from their succes- 
sion to the Crown of Great Britain. The sup- 
port of that family on the throne of Great Britain 
has preserved us from popery and despotism, and 
the deliverance is inestimable. By the expression 
popery, I do not mean the religious opinions in 
which the Catholics differ from the Protestants ; I 
mean papal power considered politically. It was 
to that power that James II. was bigotedly de- 
voted. Had he succeeded in establishing it, des 



265 

potism must have followed. But every English 
man must feel the advantage which his country 
would derive from possessing the Brunswick fa- 
mily unconnected with German dominions. 
Those dominions are incapable of defence by 
their own internal strength. Hamelen, the only 
fortress in the country, was taken and dismantled 
by Buonaparte. The King of Prussia can at any 
time take possession of Hanover, if it is not pro- 
tected either by Russia or by Austria. If Great 
Britain is interested in its defence, she becomes 
thereby to a certain decree subservient to the 
views of Russia or Austria ; a subserviency which 
every Englishman must regret 



CHAPTER XX. 

Characters of George II. and Queen Caroline. 

I have said in a former place, that the death 
of George II. did not appear to have occasioned 
much regret in the nation. I believe, that I am 
correct in this assertion. He has been reproach- 
ed with having burnt the will of his father ; Mr. 
Walpole, in his Reminiscences, gives a detailed 
account of Archbishop Wake's having produced 
the will at the Council table ; of the King's hav- 

z2 






ing taken it, and walked out of the room without 
saying a word ; and that neither the Archbishop 
nor any member of the Council had the courage 
to demand, that the will should be registered. 
But the King is unjustly reproached for this con- 
duct. The will was really waste paper : for by 
the common law, a King of England can dispose 
of no property by wall. All his property, whether 
real or personal, is vested in him in his corporate 
capacity, and devolves on his successor. 

During the reign of Queen Anne a circum- 
stance happened, which made it necessary that 
this question should be discussed. King Wil- 
liam had furnished the palace of Hampton Court: 
he made a will and appointed executors. A 
question arose, to whom did this furniture belong, 
to the executors of King William, or to Queen 
Anne, his successor? Eight of the most eminent 
lawyers gave their opinion, that the property be- 
longed to the Queen. As the matter is curious, 
and the opinion short, I will here state the words 
in which it was given, with the names of the se- 
veral lawyers who concurred in it. 

11 We the undersigned declare, that we hold it 
for undoubted law, that jewels, and other perso- 
nal property of that nature, have ever been by the 
law of England denominated catalla, Anglice 
chattels. We also declare, that by the same law 
jf England, jewels and other personal chattels of 

\t nature, which have been purchased by the 



267 

King or Queen of England, and not disposed of 
during his or her life, do not descend on the death 
of such King or Queen to that person whom such 
King or Queen may have appointed executor of 
his will ; but that they belong solely to that per- 
son who is successor to the Crown ; and this law 
has been established by the opinion of lawyers, 
and has been ever approved and observed ; and 
this we well know to be the law, from our own 
experience, from the writings of men learned in 
the law of England, from the books of the annals 
of decisions during the reigns of the several Kings 
of England, and from the records in our courts of 
justice ; and to this opinion we have subscribed 
our names. 

HEN. HATSELL. THO. POWYS. 

JA. MOUNTAGUE. R. EYRE. 

JO. HAWLES. JO. CONYERS. 

CON. PHIPPS. SAM. DODD. 

" Declared and subscribed by the above named 
persons, on the 24th December, 1708, Old Style, 
before me, 

Tho. Trevor." 

In the year 1800, I had further occasion to 
consider this subject. Towards the close of the 
session, Sir John Mitford, at that time Attorney 
General, brought in a Bill to enable the King to 
make a will of his personal property. The House 
was very thin, as it usually is at that season of the 



268 

year. Sir John Mitford moved, that the bill 
should be read a second time the next day. I 
was a little startled at this, as it had the appear- 
ance of the bill being a measure, which Sir John 
Mitford wished to have passed through the House 
without observation. I pressed, that the second 
reading might be deferred for two or three days ; 
he yielded at last, though with much reluctance. 
When the subject was the next time mentioned 
in the House, I suggested two points for his con- 
sideration. First, " whether the King's personal 
property, which was the expression used in the 
bill, was not too large and too indefinite ; and I 
wished him to consider, secondly, whether he in- 
tended that, if the King should die without hav- 
ing made a will, his personal property should be 
distributed to his next of kin, according to the 
statutes of distribution." In consequence of these 
suggestions, the bill was altered to its present 
form, viz. ; confined to the power of bequeathing 
any property that might be accumulated out of cer- 
tain funds ; and enacting, that in case his Majes- 
ty made no will, his personal property should de- 
scend according to the course of the common 
law ; that is to say, to his successor. I believe I 
was the only member who made any objections 
to this bill. I cannot therefore say, that it was 
discussed in the Hous. ; but the objections, 
which I had taken, made it necessary for me to 
examine the subject. 

His late Majesty, King George III., had acted 



269 

by his grandfathers will in the same manner as 
his grandfather had acted by that of George I. ; 
for he considered it as a non-operative instrument, 
and as such put it into the fire. I knew that 
William Duke of Cumberland, son of George II., 
had applied to the late Mr. Booth, as to the prac- 
ticability of his recovering a large legacy left him 
by his father's will. As Mr. Booth's papers were 
in the possession of a friend of mine, I applied to 
him to permit me to see Mr. Booth's opinion. 
He complied with my request. Mr, Booth's opi- 
nion was like all the other opinions of that learned 
lawyer, a most elaborate investigation of the sub- 
ject ; and he closed his opinion with this expres- 
sion, u that a King of England has, by the com- 
mon law, no power of bequeathing personal pro- 
perty." When my friend furnished me with this 
opinion of Mr. Booth, he furnished me at the 
same time with a copy of George the Second's 
will of his Hanoverian property, made in 1751 ; 
and also with a copy of a codicil to the same will, 
made in 1759 ; he also furnished me with copies 
of two codicils to the will of the King's English 
property. I had read in Bub Doddington's Me- 
moirs, the late Earl of Chatham's notion as to the 
immense personal property of George II. When 
I read it I thought the suggestion wild. But 
when I read the will of His Majesty's Hanoverian 
property, ' made in 1751, I saw that the Earl of 
Chatham's opinion was not so void of foundation 
as I had imagined, In that will the King had 



270 

left legacies to a prodigious amount. To the 
Duke of Cumberland alone he had left near four 
millions of German dollars ; with large legacies to 
his other children and private friends. But in a 
codicil to this will, made towards the close of the 
year 1759, he revoked many of these legacies, 
assigning as a reason, that his personal property 
was greatly diminished by the expenses of the 
German war. This codicil contained many very 
pathetic expressions, denoting his great affection 
for his Hanoverian subjects ;. and pointing out the 
necessity there would be of taking off many of 
those taxes, which had been imposed on them 
during the war. I do not know whether the Elec- 
tor of Hanover is restrained by the laws of that 
country from disposing of his personal property 
by will : but I have been told, that William Duke 
of Cumberland never was paid the more mode- 
rate legacy, which he was entitled to under the 
codicil. 

George II. had always publicly kept a mistress; 
most certainly with the knowledge of the Queen ; 
and it was generally believed that his mistresses 
were chosen by the Queen. I believe Mr. Wal- 
pole is right when he says, that the Queen was 
the woman who had the strongest hold of his af- 
fections. I recollect a circumstance mentioned 
to me by my father, which is a proof of this asser- 
tion. The morning after the King's death, my 
father and Sir Edward Wilmot, who were the only 
two King's physicians then in town, received an 



271 

order to be present at the opening of the body, 
and to report their opinion as to the causes of his 
Majesty's death- A paper of directions left by 
the King, as to the manner in which his body 
should be treated, &c, was produced ; and in 
that paper he had directed, that the coffin should 
be so constructed, that one side of it might be 
drawn out. The coffin in which the body* of 
Queen Caroline was placed had been construct- 
ed in a similar manner ; and his Majesty direct- 
ed, that one side of each coffin should be drawn 
out, so that the two bodies might be in one 
coffin. I believe these directions were very ex- 
actly observed. 

George II. while Electoral Prince of Hanover, 
had served in the Duke of Marlborough's army, 
and had given distinguished proofs of personal 
courage : but I believe that this was the only mi- 
litary qualification which he possessed. He had 
neither literature, nor taste, but had a strong sense 
of decorum. I will mention a little anecdote as a 
proof of this. The Duke of Richmond of that 
day was one of the King's chief companions. A 
Doctor of Divinity of the Duke's acquaintance, 
eminently learned, had acquired a knack of imi- 
tating the various caterwawlings of a cat. The 
Duke had no taste for his friend's learning ; but 
he took great pleasure in hearing him imitate the 
cat. He had often talked to the King of this un- 
common talent which his friend possessed, and 
had pressed his Majesty to allow him to place 



272 

this gentleman behind his chair, one day at din- 
ner, that he might himself judge of his extraor- 
dinary power of imitation. The King at last con- 
sented ; and this learned man was one day placed 
behind the King's chair, while he was at dinner. 
The King was for some time amused with his 
various imitations; he at last turned round to see 
the, gentleman, when he received a bow from a 
gentleman full dressed in canonicals. The King 
was so shocked at the sight, that he could not 
refrain from saying to the Duke of Richmond, 
" Do take him away : I cannot bear buffoonery 
from a man in such a dress." If this may not 
be mentioned as a proof of the King's good 
taste, it mav at least serve to show that he had a 
strong sense of decorum. 

We have a character of Queen Caroline drawn 
by the Earl of Chesterfield. He begins with 
saying, u She was a woman of lively, pretty 
parts. Her death was regretted by none but the 
King. She died meditating projects, which must 
have ended either in her own ruin, or in that of 
the country." This is the character given of her 
by Lord Chesterfield. The latter part of it al- 
ludes to an opinion, which some people enter- 
tained, that she wished to set aside Frederic 
Prince of Wales, and place William Duke of 
Cumberland on the throne. She was remarked 
for insincerity. It was a common saying among 
the courtiers, that they wished his Majesty had 
less sincerity, and her Majesty more. She seems 



273 

to have had taste. We are indebted to her for 
the Serpentine River in Hyde Park, and the trees 
so happily disposed in that Park. 

On the accession of George II., Sir Robert 
Walpole's rival exerted himself to gain the favour 
of Mrs. Howard, the King's mistress. Sir Ro- 
bert had the sagacity to discover, that the wife 
had more influence than the mistress. He often 
exulted in his superior judgment on this occa- 
sion ; and used to say, in language somewhat 
coarse, "I took the right sow by the ear." The 
Queen knew enough of the King's disposition to 
be sensible, that he did not choose to part with 
his money ; and as she never wished to displease 
his Majesty, Mr. Walpole tells us, that she ob- 
tained money from his father without the King's 
knowledge. I have no doubt that this account 
was true ; but she had probably other ways of 
supplying herself. It was so generally believed 
that she sold church preferment, that the clergy, 
who attended court, usually went by the name of 
her Majesty's black game: she died in conse- 
quence of an operation most injudiciously recom- 
mended. 

Mr. Walpole says, that Lady Sundon's influ- 
ence with Queen Caroline arose from her being 
possessed of the secret of her Majesty's being 
aiflicted with a navel rupture. I doubt the accu- 
racy of Mr. Walpole's opinion on this subject. 
Before her death the circumstance was generally 
known, Dr, Sands, a man midwife, suggested, 

a a 



274 

that a cure might be effected by the injection of 
warm water. Though my father was not at that 
time a court physician, yet he was sufficiently 
eminent in his profession to have the circum- 
stances communicated to him by medical men. 
I have heard him say, that Dr. Mead entered a 
most positive protest against the experiment ; 
and my father added, that any man, who was ac- 
quainted with anatomy, must have known that 
the proposed remedy could by no possibility be 
of service, and was likely to produce calamity. 
I believe, that Sir Edward Hulse was the only 
court physician who approved of the proposal. 
At the time that the operation was performed, 
every wish to keep her Majesty's malady a se- 
cret must have been abandoned : for the courtiers 
both male and female were assembled in the an- 
tichamber waiting the event. The intestine was 
burst in the operation, and Dr. Sands and Sir 
Edward Hulse saw, that the Queen must inevitably 
die of a mortification within a few hours. The 
only question which then remained for the two 
physicians was to consider how they might get 
out of the palace before the unfortunate issue was 
known. They determined to say that the opera- 
tion had succeeded. As soon as the two physi- 
cians came out of the Queen's chamber, and an- 
nounced their success, the old Duke of New- 
castle, who was among those who waited in the 
antichamber, ran up to Dr. Sands and hugged 
him, exclaiming, f 1 You dear creature, the nation 



275 

can never sufficiently reward you for having saved 
the life of the most valuable woman in the world V' 
The doctor struggled to get away, apprehensive 
that some of the ladies, who had gone in to the 
Queen after the physicians had left her, might 
come out and disclose the truth. 



CHAPTER XXL 



Reflections on an intended Marriage between Fre- 
deric Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer. 

Among the Reminiscences of Mr. Horace 
Walpole, he takes notice of a plan, which had 
been formed by Frederick Prince of Wales to mar- 
ry Lady Diana Spencer, the granddaughter of the 
old Duchess of Marlborough, who was to have 
given him 100,000/. with her as a dowry ; and 
that his father, Sir Robert Walpole, had prevent- 
ed the design from being carried into effect. If 
this marriage had taken place, would it have been 
beneficial or injurious to Great Britain ? 

I have already taken notice of the mischiefs, 
which have ensued from Frederick Prince of 
Wales having married a Princess of Saxe Gotha. 
It was natural, that this German Princess should 



276 

wish that her husband should possess the same 
sort of sovereignty as she had seen exercised by 
her father in Germany. But sovereignty of this 
character is inconsistent with the principles of the 
English Constitution. Had the Prince of Wales 
married Lady Diana Spencer, he would have had 
a wife not actuated by these sentiments. It may 
be said, that had the Prince of Wales married this 
lady, he would have degraded himself by thus 
forming an inferior connection ; but this is rather 
a German than an English notion. Lady Diana 
Spencer was of a family eminently noble : it is 
true, she was not of a princely house, and there- 
fore by the laws of Germany the marriage would 
have been a mesalliance^ and the children would 
not have been entitled to succeed to the Electo- 
rate of Hanover. But would not this have been 
a benefit to Great Britain ? We have derived 
many advantages from the Brunswick family hav- 
ing been placed on the throne of Great Britain ; 
but the possession of German dominions by that 
family has been a considerable drawback. From 
the accession of George I. the interests of Great 
Britain have been too frequently sacrificed to the 
interests of the Elector of Hanover. 

Of the six wives of Henry VIII. four were the 
daughters of hrs English subjects ; yet he was 
never thought degraded by those marriages. 
King Edward VI., Queen Elizabeth, King James 
I., Queen Mary, and Queen Anne, were the chil- 
dren of subjects ; yet they were never thought of 



277 

with less respect on that account. They were re- 
lated by blood to many of their subjects ; but this 
circumstance never occasioned any prejudice to 
the country. The House of Brunswick has pos- 
sessed the crown of Great Britain more than one 
hundred years ; but it still remains a German 
family. Of the King's seven sons, five have been 
educated in Germany ; and with the exception of 
the Duke of Sussex, whose health rendered such 
an education impracticable, they have been edu- 
cated in the same manner as the voun^er sons of 
other German Princes ; that is to say, as German 
military. But this is an education not likely to 
produce those sentiments, which are suited to an 
English Prince. Let me suppose that Frederick 
Prince of Wales had had as many children by an 
English wife as he had afterwards by his marriage 
with the Princess of Saxe Gotha, and that he had 
given his daughters in marriage to British Nobles, 
and married his sons to British Heiresses. 
Would this have been a prejudice to the country ? 
I think the contrary. I think it would have been 
highly beneficial. He would have surrounded 
the throne with nobles interested to guard its 
rights : his sons would not have been viewed as 
men drawing maintenance from the public purse ; 
as unnecessary, but expensive appendages. They 
would have been ingrafted in the common stock ; 
and while solicitous to guard the prerogatives of 
royalty, they would have been interested to defend 
the principles of the Constitution. View the dif- 

a a 2 , 



278 

ference which at this time exists between a young- 
er son of the King, and a nobleman of large land- 
ed estate, with a power of placing half a score 
members in the House of Commons. Is such a 
difference of situation beneficial to the country ? 
King Henry IV. is said to have been related by 
blood to every Earl in the kingdom ; and that 
the usage of the King's addressing Earls by the 
title of Cousin has arisen from this consanguinity. 
Long may the dynasty of Brunswick remain : but 
let it be a British family. I am aware, that there 
are men, who might profess to fear this influence 
of the crown over great families from consanguini- 
tv. Let it however be remembered, that it would 
be an influence perfectly consistent with the prin- 
ciples of our Constitution. I think it would be 
advantageous to the country, that a great family 
should be connected with the crown by the means 
which I have mentioned, rather than by the pos- 
session of great sinecure employments. Under 
the Plantagenet dynasty, many of our noble fami- 
lies were allied to the crown. Between sixty and 
seventy members of that family are said to have 
perished during the contest between the houses of 
York and Lancaster. This sufficiently shows 
how much the alliances of the royal family were 
extended ; and it does not appear, that any incon- 
venience ever arose from these alliances. On the 
deposition of Richard II. it is scarcely possible, 
that the title of Mortimer could have been forgot- 
ten; for he had been publicly recognized as the 



279 

heir and successor to the crown but a little while 
before. Henry IV. did not choose to define ex- 
actly by what title he claimed the crown. He 
was, by his mother's side, the heir of the Earls of 
Lancaster, who were descended from a brother of 
King Edward I. Mr. Hume takes notice of a 
report that had been propagated, that this brother 
of Edward I. was really the elder brother ; and 
that he had been postponed in the line of succes- 
sion by his parents, on account of some personal 
deformity. Whether such report ever had exist- 
ed before the accession of Henry IV., or whether 
it was ever much credited, cannot now be ascer- 
tained. Henry IV. did not choose to claim as a 
King elected by Parliament. He seems to have 
stated his title to have been that of a King de facto 
et de jure, without further explanation. If the 
principles, avowed at the Revolution in 1688, had 
been fully recognized on the deposition of Rich- 
ard II., most probably Henry IV. would have 
stated his title in a different manner. For at the 
Revolution in 1688 the Parliament proceeded on 
the idea, that James II. had abdicated, or in other 
words forfeited, not for himself alone, but for all 
those who might claim as heirs through him ; and 
therefore, after Queen Mary's death, William III. 
was preferred, in the succession, to the Princess 
Anne of Denmark. The same principle was ob- 
served in the act of settlement, when the Bruns- 
wick family, descended from a daughter of James 
I., was called to the succession before the nearer 



280 

heirs, descended from Henrietta, Duchess of Or- 
leans, daughter of Charles I. Nor is the princi- 
ple unreasonable. A peer, by the commission of 
high treason, forfeits not only for himself, but for 
all who claim through him. I am aware, that 
this is under an act of Henry VIII. ; but, if the 
subject were fully considered, I think it would be 
found, that that act of Henry VIII. was only de- 
claratory of the common law. I am also aware, 
that though the Scottish Parliament used the 
word " forfeited," the English Parliament only 
said, that the King had " abdicated." But the 
word abdicated was certainly used as synonimous 
to forfeited. At the accession of Henry IV., how 
far a King could forfeit, how far a Parliament 
could elect a new dynasty, were questions not ac- 
curately settled. And although discontented no- 
bles sometimes set up the title of Mortimer, dur- 
ing the reign of Henry IV., yet, if the mental de- 
rangement of Henry VI., inherited most probably 
from his maternal grandfather, had not given oc- 
casion to the title of Mortimer being brought for- 
ward, the same principle of law, which was adopt- 
ed in 1688, would have been held to have been 
the law on the deposition of Richard II. ; viz. 
that a King, whose conduct has induced a for- 
feiture of royalty, has forfeited, not for himself 
alone, but for all who claim the succession as 
heirs to him. But the dispute between the houses 
of York and Lancacter did not result from the 
numerous alliances of the royal family. It was a 



281 

question, as to the right of succession, between 
two branches of the same family. In reference 
to this doctrine, that a King, by his conduct, may 
forfeit for his heirs as well as for himself, I may 
be told perhaps, that, by the common law of Eng- 
land, a King can do no wrong. I admit this doc- 
trine in its fullest extent : it is the doctrine of liber- 
ty, not of despotism. The meaning of the prin- 
ciple is, thai ministers shall not protect them- 
selves from being punishable for their conduct by 
saying, that they acted under the immediate orders 
of the King himself. But since the Norman Con- 
quest, we have four instances of Kings who have 
suffered for their conduct : viz. Edward II., 
Richard II., Charles I., and James II. The three 
first were put to death ; the latter was deprived of 
royalty. Upon what principle can the conduct of 
the nation towards these four Monarchs be justi- 
fied, except on this principle, that they were pun- 
ishable for misconduct ? Whether we say that 
James II. had abdicated, or had forfeited, or had 
been deprived, if we do not use this expression to 
signify, that the right of those who were in the 
line of succession to him was extinguished by the 
King's misconduct, upon what principle was the 
princess Anne of Denmark postponed in the order 
of succession to William III. ? 



282 



CHAPTER XXIL 



On the Consequences produced by the personal 
Character of George III. 

George III. is now no more. This circum- 
stance authorizes us to review his character with 
the same freedom as we may do that of any of 
those Monarchs who have preceded him. I 
have already mentioned the character which he 
displayed at the commencement of his reign ; that 
he was sober — temperate — of domestic habits — 
addicted to no vice — swayed by no passion. 

The whole tenour of his life has justified the 
impression, which was first received of him. 
Those who approached him formed another opi- 
nion of his character; in which, however, the event 
has shown, that they have been totally mistaken. 
They thought, that he was a weak man, and that 
we should probably have a reign of favouritism. 
These ideas were entertained even by sagacious 
men ; but they were conceived erroneously. 
George III. was not a weak man. His objects 
were little, and injudiciously chosen : but no 
Monarch ever displayed more dexterity in his 
choice of the means to obtain those objects. So 
far from his life having been a reign of favouri- 
tism, he does not appear ever to have entertained 



£8S 

kindness for any minister whom he employed, ex- 
cept for the Earl of Bute : and after he found, that 
this nobleman wanted the courage necessary for 
his purposes, he seems to have withdrawn all his 
favour from him, and never more to have wished 
to replace him in office. But George III. had 
been educated by his mother. She had formed 
her ideas of sovereign power at the court of her 
father, the Duke of Saxe Gotha : and she could 
never bring herself to be of opinion, that sove- 
reignty should be exercised in Great Britain in a 
manner different from that in which she had seen 
it exercised at her father's court. In Saxe Gotha, 
sovereignty is property : in Great Britain it is 
magistracy. In Saxe Gotha, the Sovereign's per- 
sonal wishes and opinions are to be obeyed, and 
he is his own minister ; in Great Britain, the So- 
vereign is to choose for his ministers those, whonfi 
he thinks most qualified to advise measures bene- 
ficial to the country. If he does not approve of 
the measures they recommend, he may remove 
his ministers and appoint others ; but whatever 
measures are carried into effect, the advisers ought 
not only to be responsible, but distinctly known 
and recognized as the advisers. This is not an 
opinion, which has been only theoretically adopt- 
ed by those who have treated of the English Con- 
stitution ; it has been explicitly declared in Parlia- 
ment. An act once existed, enacting, that every 
measure recommended by the Privy Council 
should be signed by those Privy Counsellors who 



284 

advised it. This law sufficiently declared the 
principles of our Constitution, It completely ne- 
gatived the idea of the King being his own minis- 
ter. But ministers did not choose to have their 
names so openly exposed, and the act was repeal- 
ed. The sentiment, which the princess Dowager 
had most anxiously impressed on the King's mind 
was this, viz. that he should be his own minister; 
that he should vigilantly observe every attempt of 
his ministers to assume control over him, and use 
his endeavours to prevent it. The Princess Dow- 
ager was led to enforce this sentiment on her son, 
not only from the manner in which she had seen 
sovereign power exercised in her father's court, 
but also from the control which she had seen ex- 
ercised by the Pelham party over George II. 
The conduct of that party to her late husband and 
herself had excited her resentment ; and this re- 
sentment mingled itself with her political aversion. 
The wish to be his own minister, and to exercise 
his power personally, was the leading feature in 
George the Third's character, through his whole 
reign. It influenced his domestic, as well as his 
political conduct. There does not appear any in- 
terval, in which this sentiment was suspended. 
The miseries occasioned by his reign have all 
flowed from this source. Like other Monarchs, 
he was desirous of power. But it was not the de- 
sire of becoming a military conqueror, or even of 
extending his dominions. It was little more than 
the desire of appearing great in the eyes of his 



285 

pages and valets de chambre — that it might be said 
" The King gave away such a bishoprick," or 
" appointed to such an employment." It was the 
little object of a little mind. 

The reign of George III. has from its com- 
mencement exhibited a struggle between the 
King's personal wishes and the opinions of his os- 
tensible ministers. The two first wishes, which 
he seems to have entertained, were to break the 
power of the Pelham faction, and to restore peace. 
These wishes were judicious. But the instrument, 
which he employed to effectuate- his objects, was 
unfortunately chosen. The Earl of Bute was not 
qualified to be a minister. He was removed ; 
and from the time of his removal we may date the 
establishment of the double cabinet ; viz. secret 
advisers and ostensible ministers. 

The measure of taxing our American Colonies 
by the vote of a British Parliament, was brought 
forward while Mr. Grenville was the ostensible 
minister. Whether this measure proceeded from 
the interior cabinet, or from the ostensible minis- 
ter, is a matter of doubt. From the obstinacy 
with which the King persevered in it, from the 
eagerness with which it was proclaimed, that it 
was personally the King's object ; that those who 
supported it were his friends, while those who 
opposed it were to be ranked as disloyal, and as 
his enemies ; from this language being held long 
after the death of Mr. Grenville, when his influ- 
ence must have ceased, men are induced to s\ 

Bb 



286 

pect, that it was the King's measure rather than 
that of Mr. Grenville. 

There is another circumstance, which leads 
men to doubt, whether the measure originally 
proceeded from Mr. Grenville. From the begin- 
ning of that gentleman's administration it was 
manifestly his object to increase the public reve- 
nue. If the only idea which operated on his mind 
was, that America ought to contribute a portion 
of the public revenue, he had no occasion to bring 
forward the Stamp Act. He had the money 
already collected. He might have employed it 
in aid of the public service, without affording the 
Americans a pretence for complaint. I will ex- 
plain what I mean by this assertion. It had been 
deemed advisable to encourage the growth of va- 
rious articles of American produce, by allowing a 
bounty on their importation into Great Britain. 
I have been told, that when the Stamp Act was 
brought forward by Mr. Grenville, the bounties 
thus payable on American produce amounted to 
five hundred thousand pounds a year. Mr. 
Grenville only proposed to raise two hundred 
thousand pounds a year by the Stamp Act. If 
revenue alone was his object, it is scarcely credi- 
ble, that he could have overlooked this sum, 
which was already in the coffers of the public ; and 
resorted to a mode of taxation, which from its 
novelty was necessarily uncertain. But revenue 
was not the object of those who recommended 
the Stamp Act. Power and patronage influenced 



287 

their wishes. I do not pretend to know who 
were the real advisers of the Stamp Act. Per- 
haps hereafter it may be ascertained. The 
King dismissed George Grenville, because he 
found him not sufficiently subservient to his 
views ; he dismissed the Marquis of Rockingham, 
because that nobleman had repealed the Stamp 
Act ; he appointed the Duke of Grafton minister, 
and it was given out that the noble Duke was to 
act under the guidance of the Earl of Chatham ; 
but soon after the establishment of this ministry, 
the Earl of Chatham was taken ill ; his illness 
was of very long continuance, and of such a na- 
ture as to preclude him from all intercourse with 
others on any public business. During this inter- 
val of Lord Chatham's absence from the cabinet, 
the King contrived to have the question of taxing 
the American Colonies again brought forward. 
By playing man against man, and faction against 
faction, he at length obtained his wishes, and the 
American Colonies found themselves reduced to 
the alternative of unconditional submission, or ex- 
plicit and avowed resistance : they chose the lat- 
ter. While the King was pursuing this object of 
reviving the dispute with America, he seems to 
have employed that maxim of the politician, Di- 
vide et impera, with much dexterity. The late 
Earl of Shelburne told a friend of mine, " that the 
King possessed one art beyond any man he had 
ever known ; for that, by the familiarity of his in- 
tercourse, he obtained your confidence, procured 



288 

irom you your opinion of different public charac- 
ters, and then availed himself of this knowledge to 
sow dissension." 

The war began in 1775, and was continued for 
eight years* when the King, much against his 
wishes, was compelled to relinquish the contest — 
he was compelled to relinquish it, because he 
could find no man, who would consent to be the 
ostensible minister for carrying on the war. But 
he still retained so strong a desire to continue the 
contest, that he could not refrain from employing 
his household troops to affront the Earl of Shel- 
burne, the minister who had made the peace. 
The Earl of Shelburne would not submit to the 
affront ; he resigned, and the King found him- 
self under the necessity of appointing the Coali- 
tionists his ministers. These gentlemen came 
into office strongly impressed with .the opinion 
they had formed of the King's character ; viz. 
that nothing could induce him to relinquish the 
wish he entertained of being his own minister. I 
recollect the answer which Mr. Fox once made 
me when I put this question to him ; " Whether 
it was not possible for him to conciliate the King?" 
He replied, u No, it is impossible : no man can 
gain the King." And I believe Mr. Fox's an- 
swer was just. The King must have seen, that 
Lord Thurlow was devoted to him ; yet he re- 
moved Lord Thurlow the moment Mr. Pitt re- 
quired his dismission. And he did this, not from 
any regard for Mr. Pitt, for he never had any re- 



289 

gard for him : but because Mr. Pitt was more ne- 
cessary to his immediate views. When the 
Coalitionists came into office in the early part of 
the year 1783, they were impressed with the ne- 
cessity of controlling the King's wishes : and 
although the Coalition had to a certain degree 
rendered Mr. Fox and his friends unpopular, yet 
I think that the Coalitionists would have retained 
their power, if they had not been under the gui- 
dance of Mr. Burke. But the wrong-headedness, 
the arrogance, the violence, and the corrupt views 
of that gentleman, deprived the ministers of the 
confidence of the country. Mr. Pitt consented to 
be the King's ostensible minister ; and the gene- 
ral election which followed his appointment com- 
pleted the downfal of the Coalitionists. I have 
said, that Mr. Pitt consented to be the King's os- 
tensible minister. But I do not mean by this to 
insinuate, that Mr. Pitt was ready on all occasions 
to comply with the King's wishes. Neither of 
them loved the other. It was impossible for Mr. 
Pitt to forget the King's treatment of his father ; 
and there was too much original integrity in Mr. 
Pitt's character to allow him to be acceptable to 
the King. I believe they had many quarrels. 
There was one in particular, which became gene- 
rally known. The King had relied, that he could 
make Mr. William Grenville minister, in case he 
was compelled to separate himself from Mr. Pitt. 
Mr. Pitt determined to deprive the King of this 
great card. He therefore suggested to his Majes- 

b b 2 * 



ly, that it was necessary that Mr. Grenville should 
be placed in the House of Lords. The King saw 
Mr. Pitt's object* and resisted. It was said, that 
this resistance was Carried to such a length* that 
Mr. Pitt had actually resigned \ but that the Queen 
prevailed on the King to yield to Mr. Pitt's de- 
mand. Mr. William Grenville was removed to 
the house of Lords, and thus the King was de- 
prived of the only man, whom he could have 
named as successor to Mr. Pitt in the House of 
Commons. 

During the whole of the King's reign much use 
had been made of his personal and private charac- 
ter. It was industriously propagated, that the 
moral character of a King was the circumstance 
the most to be attended to by his subjects. And 
when the King's eldest son grew up, the contrast 
between the father and the son was industriously 
and malevolently remarked by every courtier. 
This operated two ways. It raised the King's 
character, and depressed that of him who was to 
be looked to as his successor. 

The Prince of Wales is now become our So- 
vereign ; posterity will appreciate his merits. I 
will however mention one or two circumstances 
in which he has been unfortunate. The King was 
very happy in the choice of Bishop Markham and 
Mr. Cyrill Jackson, as the Prince's preceptor and 
sub-preceptor ; I believe also, that the Earl of 
Holdernesse was a very proper man for the office 
of Governor to the Prince. Ill health made it ne- 



291 

cessary for the Earl of Holdernesse to go abroad. 
On his return, sickness had probably rendered 
him peevish. He complained of the ascendancy, 
which Mr. Jackson had obtained over the mind 
of the young Prince. Bishop Markham vindi- 
cated his assistant ; and the King availed himself 
of the disunion to dismiss them all. I consider 
the removal of Mr. Jackson as a national calami- 
ty. I knew him well. He was a man of a, mas- 
ter mind : eminently qualified to educate a young 
Prince. After he had quitted the office of sub- 
preceptor to the Prince of Wales he took orders, 
was made Dean of Christ Church, and dwindled 
into the character of a schoolmaster. Those who 
have only known him while Dean of Christ 
Church will form a very inadequate idea of the 
powers of his mind. The Prince was in his fif- 
teenth year when the Earl of Holdernesse, Bishop 
Markham, and Mr. Jackson, were removed from 
about his person. If the King could have replaced 
them even with men better qualified, they would 
most probably not have possessed the same means 
of guiding the Prince as were possessed by those 
who had the care of him from his earliest years. 
But the men who succeeded were wholly une- 
qual to the charge ; and the Prince's education 
was terminated. The Princess Dowager of 
Wales had kept the King out of society. Tie 
pretence was the preservation of his morals. The 
King seems to have had the same ideas respect- 
ing the Prince of Wales ; not recollecting, that. 



292 

as his preceptors were removed, the remaining 
part of his education must depend on his compa- 
nions. 

There was another circumstance in the King's 
conduct towards the Prince, equally unfortunate. 
When his Royal Highness came of age, an esta- 
blishment was assigned to him far beyond what 
could be supported by the very moderate income 
which was allowed him. This occasioned him 
to contract debts ; and when it became necessary 
that those debts should be discharged, very little 
care was shown to protect the Prince's character 
from disgrace. The courtiers were everywhere 
active in contrasting the regularity of the King's 
life with the indiscretions of the Prince. On the 
establishment of the Prince's household, every 
man must have seen, that an expense was created 
which his income would not be able to discharge. 
Parental affection, and the political solicitude 
which the Monarch in possession ought to have 
for the character of his immediate successor, 
should both have attracted the King's attention. 
There was another circumstance also, which 
ought not to have been overlooked. The 
Duchy of Cornwall was the Prince's property 
from the hour of his birth. When he came of 
age, the Prince was put in possession of the re- 
venues of this Duchy. But the Prince obtained 
no part of that revenue, which had been received 
from the Duchy during his minority. A differ- 
ent treatment was shown to the Duke of York. 



293 

When he came of age, the whole revenue re- 
ceived from the Bishoprick of Osnaburg, during 
his minority, was paid over to him. There was 
another circumstance respecting the Duchy of 
Cornwall, by which a still greater injury was done 
to the Prince of Wales. The King procured an 
act of Parliament to be passed, authorizing him 
to grant leases of the Prince's lands in Cornwall 
for ninety-nine years, determinable upon lives ; 
for these leases the King received fines during 
the Prince's minority, to the amount I believe of 
about two hundred and fifty thousand pounds. 
What a difference would it have made to the 
Prince, if, when he came of age, estates in pos- 
session had been delivered up to him, instead of 
reversions expectant on leases for ninety-nine 
years, with small rents reserved. Even this sum 
of two hundred and fifty thousand pounds received 
by the King for the leases which he had granted, 
though obviously an inadequate compensation, 
was not paid over to the Prince. It may be said 
perhaps, that the King received this power from 
Parliament. I admit it : but the Parliament had 
no right to grant this power. It was a gross breach 
of faith by the guardian of the Prince's estates. I 
am justified in saying, that the Parliament is as 
much the guardian of the Prince's estates as it is 
of the demesnes of the Crown. I am justified in 
saying this by the conduct of the House of Com- 
mons in the reign of Henry IV. Richard II. had 
granted away many of the estates of the Duchy 



294 

of Cornwall. The House of Commons took no- 
tice of this, and sent up a bill to the House of 
Lords, requesting their concurrence in a bill for 
the restoration of these lands to Prince Henry, af- 
terwards King under the name of Henry V. The 
House of Lords refused to concur ; but though 
they refused to concur with the Commons in the 
bill, the House of Lords addressed the King, to 
direct the law officers of the crown to commence 
suits against the possessors of these lands on be- 
half of the Prince : the address was complied with, 
and the lands were recovered for the Prince. In 
the suit subsequently instituted, in the reign of 
James I. by his son Prince Henry, for lands, part 
of the Duchy of Cornwall, which had been im- 
providently granted away by Queen Elizabeth, 
though the proceedings were only in a court of 
law, the same doctrine seems to have been adopt- 
ed ; viz. that the estates of the Prince of Wales 
were as much under the protection of Parliament 
as the demesnes of the crown. I am aware that 
it will be said, the Prince of Wales afterwards re- 
ceived a compensation for his rights. He brought 
a suit against the King, by petition, and, in 1803, 
received two hundred and twenty thousand pounds 
for compromising his claim ; a sum shamefully 
inadequate. But what would have been the dif- 
ferent situation of the Prince, if he had received 
even this sum in 1783, when he came of age, in- 
stead of receiving it in 1803 ? In mentioning the 
subject, one can scarcely refrain from contrasting 



295 

the conduct of Edward III. with that of George 
III. When Edward the Third's son was little 
more than eleven years of age, he gave him an 
hereditary estate in the Duchy of Cornwall, with 
the immediate possession of all its revenues. He 
at the same time invested him for his life in the 
Principality of Wales, and the Earldom of Ches- 
ter, with the immediate possession of their reve- 
nues. The reason assigned in our law books for 
this conduct is, because the King's son coruscat 
patris radiis. Edward III. saw with pleasure the 
attention of his subjects attracted towards his son 
and future successor. German sentiments pre- 
vented George III. from feeling this delight. 

Mr. Pitt was completely established in the si- 
tuation of prime minister after the general election 
in 1784; and seems to have had more control 
over the King than any other ostensible minister, 
subsequently to the resignation of the Earl of 
Bute. Mr. Pitt owed this power to the fear in 
which the King stood of the Coalitionists ; and 
after his Majesty's illness in 1788-9, his apprehen- 
sions were probably increased. The French Re- 
volution burst forth in 1789. George III. saw 
the consequences, which this Revolution was like- 
ly to produce on kingly power. It is well known, 
that he said to every courtier who approached 
him, " If a stop is not put to French principles, 
there will not be a King left in Europe in a few 
years." But Mr. Pitt had sufficient control over 
the King to restrain him from embarking in war 



296 

against France. It was not till the end of the 
year 1792, that Mr. Pitt's influence on this sub- 
ject was overruled. At the close of that year, 
Mr. Burke prevailed on the great Whig families 
to declare themselves in favour of a war with 
France. They were received by the King with 
joy. Mr. Pitt yielded to the King's wishes, and 
the crusade against French principles was com- 
menced. The contest is not yet terminated. 
This is my opinion, while resident in France, on 
the 7th of March, 1820. In the town which I 
now inhabit, the house formerly occupied by the 
Inquisition has been purchased for the use of the 
Missionaries : and it is well known, that a body 
of men, under the name of secrets, are still kept 
in the same town and its neighbourhood. Proba- 
bly they are not so numerous as they were in 1815. 
They were then uncontrollable. They openly 
murdered General Ramel, the Commander of the 
King's forces in this town. I believe other ge- 
nerals in the service of Louis XVIII. experien- 
ced the same fate in other parts of France. The 
Missionaries openly preach the necessity of restor- 
ing confiscated property to the church ; and their 
discourses have much influence on the common 
people. While it is known, that two such bodies 
of men are kept on foot, can it be believed, that 
the nobles and fanatics have relinquished their 
hope of re-establishing the ancien regime ? They 
will probably make the attempt, but their efforts 
will fail. The great body of the French Nation 



297 

will never consent to the re-establishment of old 
abuses. 

The contest is begun in Spain : the army, the 
commercial interest, and men of learning, are 
united in the demand of a Constitution, and the 
assembly of the Cortes. They are opposed by 
the King, the priesthood, and a large proportion 
of the nobles. Most probably a free Constitu- 
tion will terminate the contest. Kings and nobles 
ought to recollect, that the United States of Ame- 
rica have now acquired that degree of impor- 
tance, that the opinions of the inhabitants of that 
country must necessarily influence the opinions of 
the inhabitants of Europe. The Spanish Colo- 
nies in America will probably soon form a Go- 
vernment similar to that of the United States. Let 
Kings and Nobles also recollect, that every effort, 
which has hitherto been made to stop French 
principles, has only contributed to strengthen their 
growth. 

During five months, in the year 1788-9, Roy- 
alty in Great Britain existed only in abeyance. 
This was a misfortune. Should a long minority 
take place before the House of Commons is 
made the representative of the intelligence and 
opulence of the country, Oligarchy or Revolu- 
tion will most probably be our lot. There is an- 
other circumstance which deserves the considera- 
tion of Kings. It has been generally supposed, 
that standing armies form the surest support of 

c c 



298 

royal power : but this is not always the case: the 
French Revolution was effected by the army. If 
Spain succeeds in establishing a free Constitution, 
she will be indebted for it to her army. 

I have said, that George III. had not the wish 
to be a military conqueror. Some perhaps may 
think that the acquisitions in India prove this 
opinion to be erroneous. But let it be remem- 
bered, that the acquisitions in India were not the 
work of the King, or even of the British Nation. 
The civil and military servants of the India Com- 
pany derived immediate wealth to themselves 
from every new conquest. They suggested, that 
the newly acquired dominion would yield an in- 
crease of revenue to the India Company. But 
this statement was most commonly found to be 
false. The revenues of the new conquest were 
almost always found, after a few years possession, 
to be unequal to the increased expense. The 
conquests in India are the acquisitions of a trading 
company, pirate et boatiqitiere. 

At the accession of George III. he seemed to 
pay very little attention to his German dominions. 
They had been the object of his grandfather's 
affection; and George III. had been educated to 
dislike every thing which his grandfather had 
been fond of. But in the progress of his reign 
his attention was drawn to his German sovereignty. 
His younger sons were sent to Germany, and 
educated like the sons of other German Princes. 



299 

There is no proof that George III. was avaricious. 
There is reason to believe, that he received large 
presents from Indian Princes ; but those presents 
were in diamonds, and given by him to the 
Queen. Although he was not avaricious, yet he 
never displayed any signal marks of generosity. 
It is possible, that at the commencement of his 
•reign he conferred considerable gifts on the Earl 
of Bute. But he does not appear ever to have 
been solicitous to relieve his own sons from their 
pecuniary embarrassments. 

In his children George III. was peculiarly for- 
tunate. For of fifteen, only two died in their in- 
fancy. Of the remaining thirteen, every man in 
private life would have been proud. 

I will add but one reflection more. Few Kings 
haye ever reigned, whose personal character and 
personal wishes have operated such important 
changes. 



300 



CHAPTER XXIIL 



On the Three Kings of the Brunsxvick Race. 



Three reigns of Princes of the Brunswick fa- 
mily have passed away. During the reign of 
George I., the King never seems to have thought 
of Great Britain, except only as he could make it 
subservient to his German views. The first act 
of his reign was to acquire Bremen and Verden. 
This was a gross act of injustice : and a violation 
of that guarantee of the treaty of Minister, in 
1648, to which England stood pledged. That 
treaty had settled the rights of the different 
Princes of Germany. I believe the seizure of 
Bremen and Verden was the first open violation of 
that treaty ; and it served as a precedent for 'all 
those infringements of the rights of German 
Princes which have since followed. The Bri- 
tish Parliament paid two hundred and fifty thou- 
sand pounds for this acquisition. The loss of the 
friendship of Sweden, which was the consequence 



301 

of this act of injustice, was an injury to the in- 
terests of Great Britain of much more impor- 
tance. Every year of this King's reign seems 
to have produced some treaty, which had for its 
object his own interest as a German Prince. In 
1718, Sir George Byng, an English Admiral, 
destroyed the Spanish Fleet. The gallantry of 
this achievement was much applauded, but with- 
out reason ; for the Spanish Fleet was in such a 
condition as to render it wholly unequal to the 
contest. It was a violation of the law of nations, 
for no hostilities had been previously declared be- 
tween Spain and Great Britain. The measure 
was adopted to promote the views of the House 
of Austria in Sicily. 

Perhaps George II. was more attentive to the 
interests of Great Britain than his father had 
been. But the Continental wars of 1741 and 
1756 were undertaken purely to promote the 
King's interests as a German Prince. 

George III., at his accession, did not appear 
to have the same partiality for Hanover as had 
been shown by his predecessors. As he had ne- 
ver been in Hanover, he did not feel that predi- 
lection, which is the result of early habits : and 
he had been educated to dislike the German war, 
because it was the measure of his grandfather. 
But he gradually became a German Prince. To 
that country he sent his younger sons for educa- 
tion. From that country their wives were to be 

Dd 



302 

brought ; and when the French Revolution broke 
out, the danger of its example affecting other 
Governments, must have been more strongly felt 
by him as a German Prince than as a King of 
Great Britain. But the calamity, which George 
III. has brought upon Great Britain, by the pres- 
sure of those taxes, which have been imposed to 
support his unnecessary wars, has almost absorbed 
every other consideration. Yet the People of 
England have not abandoned the wish of being 
separated from Hanover. This led them to see 
with pleasure the prospect of the succession of 
the Princess Charlotte. In that hope they have 
been disappointed. Should the daughter of the 
late Duke of Kent succeed to the Crown, their 
wishes may be realized. 



ITNJD. 



fly*. 



^h^«s 









m*z^X3££?jm£L 






J&& 






: *dS^ 






<SE3 o«r "C <c 



<M 






C# C<§£'<< 



«MC5*t!<i 


















J«E^«K*L: 







































CTcac 



:<^- cc 









< ®: «:< 












c<3C <H_c 
^- c<csc - 

CI < <JT ' • 

Ml <S< 

/ c < 

:>cccc 






4tX 









CcOSCil^- <5< 



g CfSCcJ 



«: <«C 



< 



r<c 



^| j^ . f A^pM 


1 ,-^ ^ 


, *<:<ca 


^ ^ ■ ^^^^^y- - 




KCCCC4L 


< "3SKSCl^C£iC 


< < 

3 s " ' .■ < 


^M 






vmsm. 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

iilllllflllllir 

021 934 779 






r*T 



wmk 



I 









i« 






> 






ffW* 



Urn 



